Gilbert v. State

Full title: LEWIS J. GILBERT, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Twelfth District, Tyler

Date published: Aug 31, 2006

Nos. 12-06-00005-CR, 12-06-00006-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 31, 2006)

Opinion

Nos. 12-06-00005-CR, 12-06-00006-CR

Opinion delivered August 31, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH.

Appeals from the 258th Judicial District Court of Trinity County, Texas.

Panel consisted of WORTHEN, C.J., GRIFFITH, J. and HOYLE, J.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Lewis J. Gilbert appeals his conviction for the offenses of sexual assault of a child and indecency with a child. Appellant pleaded guilty to both offenses, and his appellate counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and Gainous v.State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Crim.App. 1969). Appellant did not file a brief. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Appellant pleaded guilty to the offenses of sexual assault of a child¹ and indecency with a child.² The victims were his stepdaughters. There was no plea agreement. The trial court found Appellant guilty and assessed punishment at twenty years of imprisonment on each charge. This appeal followed.

ANALYSIS PURSUANT TO ANDERS V. CALIFORNIA

Appellant's counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders and Gainous. Counsel states that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and that he is well acquainted with the facts of this case. In compliance with Anders, Gainous, and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978), counsel's brief presents a chronological summary of the procedural history of the case and further states that counsel is unable to present any arguable issues for appeal. We have considered the brief submitted by Appellant's counsel and have conducted our own independent review of the record. SeeAnders, 386 U.S. at 745, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see alsoPenson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S. Ct. 346, 350, 102 L. Ed. 2d 300 (1988). We have found no reversible error. SeeBledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005).

CONCLUSION

As required, Appellant's counsel has moved for leave to withdraw. SeeStafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). After considering the record and the brief and having found no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant Appellant's counsel's motion for leave to withdraw.