Court Opinion

ID: 2771598
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-01-21 08:10:43.441926+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:44:41.842340
License: Public Domain

In The

                              Court of Appeals
                   Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                            _________________
                             NO. 09-14-00030-CR
                             NO. 09-14-00036-CR
                            _________________

                      BOBBY LEE DUGGER, Appellant

                                       V.

                      THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
________________________________________________________________________

                  On Appeal from the 359th District Court
                        Montgomery County, Texas
              Trial Cause No. 13-08-08709 CR (Counts 1 and 3)
________________________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      A jury convicted Bobby Lee Dugger of two counts of failing to comply with

the sex-offender registration requirements. After a hearing on punishment, during

which Dugger pleaded true to two enhancement paragraphs, the trial court

sentenced Dugger to life imprisonment on each count and ordered the sentences to

run concurrently. Dugger’s appellate counsel filed a brief in each appeal that

presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes Dugger’s

                                       1
appeals are frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State,

573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). We granted an extension of time for

Dugger to file a pro se brief, but we received no response from Dugger.

      We have independently examined the appellate records, and we agree with

counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support the appeals. We find it

unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeals. Compare

Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial

court’s judgments.1

      AFFIRMED.

                                             ______________________________
                                                    CHARLES KREGER
                                                          Justice

Submitted on December 23, 2014
Opinion Delivered January 21, 2015
Do not publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson. JJ.

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