Court Opinion

ID: 2861205
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 21:24:19.266442+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:34:37.874236
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-97-00529-CR

Gary Evan Perdue, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 368TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 96-542-K368, HONORABLE BURT CARNES, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

A jury found appellant guilty of two counts of indecency with a child by contact. 
Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 21.11 (West 1994).  On one count, the jury assessed punishment at
imprisonment for ten years and recommended community supervision.  For the other count, the
jury assessed punishment at imprisonment for nine years.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no
arguable grounds to be advanced.  See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State,
573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App.
1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d
137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant
was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief
has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support
the appeal.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Before Justices Powers, Aboussie and Kidd

Affirmed

Filed:   October 22, 1998

Do Not Publish