From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cooksey v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston
Apr 23, 2009
No. 01-07-00475-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 23, 2009)

Opinion

No. 01-07-00475-CR

Opinion issued April 23, 2009. DO NOT PUBLISH. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

On Appeal from the 230th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 1102483.

Panel consists of Justices JENNINGS, HANKS, and BLAND.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Appellant, David Earl Cooksey, was convicted by a jury of the offense of aggravated sexual assault. Appellant elected to have his punishment assessed by the jury. Appellant was sentenced to confinement for 60 years and assessed a fine of $10,000. We affirm. Appellant's counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error, that the appeal is without merit and is frivolous, and that the appeal must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978). Counsel represents that she has served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. Having reviewed the record and counsel's brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005). We affirm the judgments of the trial court and grant counsel's motion to withdraw. Attorney Patricia Sedita must immediately send the notice required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of that notice with the Clerk of this Court. Any pending motions are denied as moot.

Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal andthat he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of CriminalAppeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005).


Summaries of

Cooksey v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston
Apr 23, 2009
No. 01-07-00475-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 23, 2009)
Case details for

Cooksey v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID EARL COOKSEY, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston

Date published: Apr 23, 2009

Citations

No. 01-07-00475-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 23, 2009)