Court Opinion

ID: 4657697
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-02-05 07:19:53.319566+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:01:18.613640
License: Public Domain

In The

                                Court of Appeals

                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                               __________________

                               NO. 09-19-00417-CR
                               __________________

                   MATTHEW TURNER CURRY, Appellant

                                         V.

                       THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

                On Appeal from the 9th District Court
                     Montgomery County, Texas
                   Trial Cause No. 19-02-02517-CR
__________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

       In an open plea, appellant Matthew Turner Curry pleaded guilty to aggravated

sexual assault of a child under six years of age. After conducting a sentencing

hearing, the trial court assessed Curry’s punishment at life in prison.

      Curry’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s

professional evaluation of the record and concludes that the appeal is frivolous. See

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.

                                          1
Crim. App. 1978). On September 14, 2020, we granted an extension of time for

Curry to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Curry.

      We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion

that no arguable issues support the appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order

appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d

503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1

      AFFIRMED.

                                                     _________________________
                                                        W. SCOTT GOLEMON
                                                            Chief Justice

Submitted on January 26, 2021
Opinion Delivered February 3, 2021
Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.

      1Curry   may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
                                        2