Court Opinion

ID: 3091918
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 04:05:27.988701+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:41:15.217895
License: Public Domain

In
The
                                                Court
of Appeals
                        Sixth
Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
 
                                                ______________________________
 
                                                             No. 06-10-00167-CR
                                                ______________________________
 
 
                              WILLIAM ALBERT SCHATTE,
Appellant
 
                                                                V.
 
                                     THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
 
 
                                                                                                  

 
 
                                       On Appeal from the 336th
Judicial District Court
                                                             Fannin County, Texas
                                                            Trial
Court No. 23007
 
                                                         
                                         
 
 
 
                                          Before Morriss, C.J.,
Carter and Moseley, JJ.
                                            Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley

                                                     MEMORANDUM 
OPINION
 
            William
Albert Schatte appeals from his convictions on his plea of guilty, made before
a jury, for aggravated sexual assault in four cases, and for one conviction for
indecency with a child.  In a unified
brief, he complains that the trial court committed reversible error at the
punishment phase that requires remanding the cause for a new hearing on
punishment.
            In
this case, he was convicted for aggravated sexual assault of a child, and was
sentenced to ninety-nine years’ imprisonment and a $10,000.00 fine.  
            Schatte
raises a single issue on appeal, in which he contends that the trial court
erred by admitting evidence of a prior bad act—anal contact with the
victim—although the State had not given him notice of its intent to use the
evidence, notwithstanding his request for such notice.  
            Because
the issue raised in each appeal is identical, for the reasons stated in our
opinion dated this day in Schatte v. State, cause number 06-10-00166-CR, we affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
 
 
                                                                        Bailey
C. Moseley
                                                                        Justice
 
Date Submitted:          May
25, 2011
Date Decided:             May
26, 2011
 
Do Not Publish