From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lee v. State

State of Texas in the Eleventh Court of Appeals
Aug 8, 2019
No. 11-18-00140-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 8, 2019)

Opinion

No. 11-18-00140-CR

08-08-2019

RONALD EDGAR LEE, JR., Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 104th District Court Taylor County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 19309B

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury convicted Appellant, Ronald Edgar Lee, Jr., of continuous sexual abuse of a child and assessed his punishment at confinement for life. On appeal, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals concluded that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for continuous sexual abuse of a child, but was sufficient to establish the lesser-included offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child. See Lee v. State, 537 S.W.3d 924, 926-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2017). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reformed the trial court's judgment to reflect a conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child and remanded the case to the trial court for a new punishment hearing. Id. at 927. Following the new punishment hearing, the jury assessed Appellant's punishment at confinement for forty years and a fine of $2,500. We modify the judgment to reflect that the victim was nine years old at the time of the offense and to reflect a complete reference to the applicable statute and, as modified, affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Appellant's court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. Counsel provided Appellant with a copy of the brief and the motion to withdraw. Counsel informed Appellant that counsel would provide to Appellant a copy of the "court record" on the new punishment hearing. Counsel also provided Appellant with a pro se motion for access to the appellate record as well as contact information for the district clerk and this court. Counsel advised Appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel's brief. Counsel also advised Appellant of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review in order to seek review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

Appellant has not filed a response to counsel's Anders brief. Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.

We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 68.

However, we note that the trial court's June 22, 2019 Second Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment of Conviction by Jury incorrectly reflects that "[t]he age of the victim at the time of the offense was 11 years," while the record reflects that the victim was nine years old at the time of the offense. We also note that the reference to the statute for the offense in the June 22, 2019 Second Nunc Pro Tunc Judment of Conviction by Jury is incomplete. We have the authority to modify the trial court's judgment to correctly reflect the trial court proceedings when we have the necessary information to do so. See TEX R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). Therefore, we modify the trial court's June 22, 2019 Second Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment of Conviction by Jury to reflect the following: "The age of the victim at the time of the offense was 9 years," and the "Statute for Offense" is "22.021(a)(1)(B)(i), (a)(2)(B) Penal Code."

We grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court as modified.

PER CURIAM August 8, 2019 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J. Willson, J., not participating.

Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment.


Summaries of

Lee v. State

State of Texas in the Eleventh Court of Appeals
Aug 8, 2019
No. 11-18-00140-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 8, 2019)
Case details for

Lee v. State

Case Details

Full title:RONALD EDGAR LEE, JR., Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:State of Texas in the Eleventh Court of Appeals

Date published: Aug 8, 2019

Citations

No. 11-18-00140-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 8, 2019)