Court Opinion

ID: 2867730
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 02:18:06.296201+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:15.342846
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-04-00219-CR

Louis Fagins, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 2034623, HONORABLE BRENDA KENNEDY, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

At a bench trial, appellant Louis Fagins was convicted of assaulting a public servant
and sentenced to three years in prison.  See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.01(a)(1), (b)(1) (West Supp.
2004-05).  His 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, who 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.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

				__________________________________________
				David Puryear, Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Kidd and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed:   October 28, 2004
Do Not Publish