## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 15

- 00171

- CR

GARY CARSON, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 102nd District Court Bowie County, Texas Trial Court No. 14F0103

- 102

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Moseley , * JJ. Memorandum Opinion on Remand by Chief Justice Morriss

________________________
* Bailey C. Moseley , Justice, Retired, Sitting by Assignment2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION ON REMAND Gary Carson was convicted on open guilty pleas in the 102 nd Judicial District Court in Bowie County, Texas, of three counts 1 of assault on public servants who were performing public servant duties ( T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 22.0 1( b ) (1 ) (West Supp. 2018 ) ) , the penalties being enhanced by previous convictions ( T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 12.425 ( West Supp. 201 8 ) ) , and three counts of bail jumping ( T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 38.10 (West 2016 ) ). Carson v. State , 515 S.W.3d 372, 37 4 (Tex. App.

— Texarkana 2017) , rev’d, Carson v.State , Nos. PD

- 0205

- 17, PD

0206

- 17, PD

- 0207

- 17, PD

- 0208

- 17, 2018 WL 4472228, at *5 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 19, 2018)

. Carson executed a written waiver of his right to appeal , and after a trial on punishment, the trial court sentenced him to fifty years’ imprisonment in each of the assault cases and ten years’ imprisonment on each count of the bail jumping. 2 Id. This Court reversed and remanded the case for a new trial on punishment, having found that Carson’s w aiver of appeals was invalid and that fundamental error was committed at sentencing. Id. at 385

– 86. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals found that Carson’s waiver was valid, reversed our judgment , and remanded the case to this Court for consideration of Carson’s heretofore unaddressed argument.

1 The charges were made through four separate indict ments. Carson has filed a single brief raising the same issues in all four cases. We reach the same result in the other three cases, released today in separate opinions in cause numbers 06

- 15

- 00170

- CR, 06

- 15

- 00172

- CR, and 06

- 15

- 00173

- CR.

2 The assault ch arges were enhanced by two prior felony convictions, to which Carson pled true. The fifty

- year sentences were to run concurrent ly to each other, and the ten

- year sentences were to run concurrent ly to each other, but consecutively to the fifty

- year sentence s.3 Here, Carson appeals from his conviction for assaulting Officer Shawn Jacobs. He contends that despite the waiver, he may still appeal his conviction under the Young exception. 3
Carson , 2018 WL 4472228, at *5

. We addressed this issue in detail in our opinion of this date on Carson ’ s appeal in cause number 06

- 15

- 00170

- CR. For the reasons stated therein, we likewise overrule Carson’s point of

error here.
We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice Date Submitted: October 25, 2018 Date Decided: January 9 , 2019 Do Not Publish

3 Because the underlying facts of the case have been discussed in detail in our prior opinion in this case, we address only those facts relevant to the point of error present ed on remand.