Court Opinion

ID: 2874383
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 05:48:54.813316+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:20:47.728084
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-07-00594-CR

Adrian Lee, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-DC-06-100026, HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING

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

	Appellant Adrian Lee was convicted of aggravated sexual assault and sentenced to
thirty years' imprisonment.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.021 (West Supp. 2008).  Appellant's
appointed attorney has filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.  
	Counsel's brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 743-44
(1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no
arguable grounds to be advanced.  See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); Anders, 386 U.S. at
743-44; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d
684, 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). 
Appellant's attorney sent appellant a copy of the brief and advised him that he had the right to
examine the record and file a pro se brief.  See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Jackson v. State,
485 S.W.2d 553, 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972).  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 have considered the evidence presented to the jury and reviewed the
procedures that were observed and we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the
appeal.  We grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of conviction. (1) 

					___________________________________________
					David Puryear, Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Puryear and Pemberton
Affirmed
Filed:   August 22, 2008
Do Not Publish
1.   No substitute counsel will be appointed.  Should appellant wish to seek further review of
his case by the court of criminal appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for
discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review.  See generally Tex. R. App.
P. 68-79 (governing proceedings in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals).  Any petition for
discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the date
this Court overrules the last timely motion for rehearing filed.  See Tex. R. App. P. 68.2.  The
petition must be filed with this Court, after which it will be forwarded to the court of criminal
appeals along with the rest of the filings in the cause.  See Tex. R. App. P. 68.3, 68.7.  Any petition
for discretionary review should comply with rules 68.4 and 68.5 of the rules of appellate procedure. 
See Tex. R. App. P. 68.4, 68.5.