From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lowe v. State

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
Mar 5, 2014
NO. 09-13-00110-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 5, 2014)

Opinion

NO. 09-13-00042-CRNO. 09-13-00109-CRNO. 09-13-00110-CRNO. 09-13-00111-CRNO. 09-13-00112-CRNO. 09-13-00113-CR

03-05-2014

KENNETH LOWE, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 221st District Court

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 12-08-08497 CR, Counts 1 - 6


MEMORANDUM OPINION

Kenneth Lowe pleaded guilty to indecency with a child by sexual contact, improper photography, and four counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child. The trial court sentenced Lowe to two years in prison for indecency, 180 days in state jail for improper photography, and life in prison for each of the aggravated sexual assault offenses. The trial court ordered that the sentences for aggravated sexual assault run consecutively.

Lowe is also referred to in the record as "Kenneth Shaun Lowe."

Lowe's appellate counsel filed briefs that present counsel's professional evaluation of the record and conclude Lowe's appeals are frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). We granted an extension of time for Lowe to file a pro se brief, but we received no response from Lowe. We have determined that these appeals are wholly frivolous. We have independently examined the clerk's records and the reporter's records, and we agree that no arguable issues support the appeals. We find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeals. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

However, we note that the judgment in count V erroneously states that Lowe's sentence shall run consecutively with counts "III, VI, and VI of Cause 12-08-08497-CR." This Court has the authority to modify the trial court's judgments to correct a clerical error. Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). Therefore, we delete the following language from the judgment in Count V, Appeal No. 09-13-00112-CR: "III, VI, and VI of Cause 12-08-08497-CR" and substitute the following language: "III, IV, and VI of Cause 12-08-08497-CR." We affirm the judgment in Count V, Appeal No. 09-13-00112-CV as modified. We affirm the trial court's judgments in Count I, Appeal No. 09-13-00042-CR; Count II, Appeal No. 09-13-00109-CR; Count III, Appeal No. 09-13-00110-CR; Count IV, Appeal No. 09-13-00111-CR; and Count VI, Appeal No. 09-13-00113-CR.

Lowe may challenge our decision by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
--------

COUNTS I, II, III, IV, AND VI AFFIRMED.

COUNT V AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

_______________

STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice
Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.


Summaries of

Lowe v. State

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
Mar 5, 2014
NO. 09-13-00110-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 5, 2014)
Case details for

Lowe v. State

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH LOWE, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

Date published: Mar 5, 2014

Citations

NO. 09-13-00110-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 5, 2014)