Al James Williams v. State ( 2002 )

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06-01-00169-CR ______________________________



AL JAMES WILLIAMS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 232nd Judicial District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court No. 852236

---

Before Morriss, C.J., Grant and Ross, JJ. Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss

O P I N I O N

Al James Williams appeals from his conviction for the offense of sexual assault on a child. This case was consolidated for trial with two other charges which arose out of the same criminal episode, both of which are also on appeal before this court. ⁽¹⁾ The jury found Williams guilty of all three offenses, and in this case assessed life imprisonment.

Counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Counsel states he has reviewed the record in detail. He then sets out both the procedural history of the case and summarizes the evidence presented at trial and punishment for our review, and concludes there are no arguable contentions of error that might result in reversal. He has accordingly also filed a Motion to Withdraw. Counsel sent Williams a copy of his brief and advised him by letter that he believes that there are no arguable contentions of error and informed him of his right to review the record and file a brief pro se. No brief has been filed pro-se .

Counsel has filed a brief which discusses the record and reviews pretrial, trial, and punishment proceedings in detail. Counsel has thus provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced, as required by High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978); see also Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

We have reviewed the brief in detail and have also conducted an independent review of the record. We agree with counsel that no reversible error is apparent from this record.

The judgment is affirmed.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: July 2, 2002

Date Decided: July 3, 2002

Do Not Publish

1. This appeal is trial court number 852236, sexual assault on a child. The companion cases are trial court number 852235, indecency with a child, and trial court number 852237, indecency with a child. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in this case, thirty-five years' imprisonment in case 852235, and to fifty years' imprisonment in 852237. The first trial court made the two sentences to run consecutively, the third to run concurrently with the life sentence.

reference"/>

                                                         In The

                                                Court of Appeals

                        Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

                                                ______________________________

                                                             No. 06-09-00118-CV

                                                ______________________________

                                 IN RE:  EXPUNCTION REQUEST BY

RALPH EDWARD EUGENE, JR.

                                         On Appeal from the 7th Judicial District Court

                                                             Smith County, Texas

                                                         Trial Court No. 09-0401-A

                                          Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

                                            Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley

                                                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

            Ralph Edward Eugene, Jr., filed his notice of appeal December 9, 2009.^[1]

            Eugene has neither paid a filing fee nor made any claim of indigency.  See Tex. R. App. P. App. A(B)(1), 20.1.  Further, there is no information to indicate Eugene has made efforts to have either the clerk’s record or reporter’s record filed with this Court.

            On February 11, 2010, we contacted Eugene by letter, giving him an opportunity to cure the various defects, and warning him that if we did not receive an adequate response within ten days, this appeal would be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b), (c).

            We have received no communication from Eugene. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b), (c), we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution.

                                                                        Bailey C. Moseley

                                                                        Justice

Date Submitted:          March 15, 2010

Date Decided:             March 16, 2010

---

^[1]Originally appealed to the Twelfth Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts.  See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 73.001 (Vernon 2005).