Hale v. State

Full title: DAVID LEE HALE, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi-Edinburg

Date published: Jun 12, 2003

No. 13-02-394-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 12, 2003)

Opinion

No. 13-02-394-CR.

June 12, 2003. Do not publish.

On appeal from the 252nd District Court of Jefferson County, Texas.

Before Justices Yañez, Castillo, and Baird¹

1 Former Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Charles F. Baird assigned to this Court by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas pursuant to Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 74.003 (Vernon 1998).

OPINION

CHARLES F. BAIRD, Justice

Appellant was charged by indictment with the offense of sexual assault. The indictment also alleged a prior felony conviction for the purpose of enhancing the range of punishment. Appellant and the State were unable to reach a plea bargain agreement. Nevertheless, appellant pled guilty to the charged offense, and true to the enhancement allegation. Appellant did so seeking either deferred adjudication community supervision, or a minimum prison sentence. The State was seeking a sentence of fifteen years. The trial judge found appellant's pleas were freely and voluntarily entered, recessed the proceedings, and ordered the preparation of a pre-sentence investigation report. When the proceedings resumed, the trial judge found appellant guilty, the enhancement allegation true, and assessed punishment at fifteen years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — Institutional Division. We affirm.

I. Appellant's Appeal

Counsel has filed an Anders brief. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel states that he has reviewed the statement of facts and the clerk's record in this case, that he has researched the applicable statutory and decisional authority, and that he has found no reversible error and no arguable grounds of error for purposes of appeal. The State has filed a brief concurring with counsel's assessment of the appellate record. We find counsel has presented a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978). Additionally, counsel certifies he served a copy of his brief and the reporter's record on appellant, and informed appellant of his right to file a pro se brief. No such brief has been filed. We too have carefully reviewed the appellate record and have found no reversible error or any arguable point(s) of error for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.