Bradric Givante Dwarren Fransaw v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 17, 2013
Docket03-12-00349-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Bradric Givante Dwarren Fransaw v. State (Bradric Givante Dwarren Fransaw v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bradric Givante Dwarren Fransaw v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00349-CR

Bradric Givante Dwarren Fransaw, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 66960, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury convicted Bradric Givante Dwarren Fransaw of four counts of aggravated

sexual assault and assessed his punishment at ninety-nine years’ imprisonment on each count. See

Tex. Penal Code § 22.021(a)(1)(A)(i), (ii), (2)(A)(iv).

Fransaw’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a

brief concluding that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements

of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the

record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio,

488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State,

516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972);

Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel sent a copy of the brief to Fransaw and advised him of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See

Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Fransaw did not file a pro se brief and did not request an extension of time.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Garner v. State,

300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous, and his motion to withdraw is

granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Jeff Rose, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Rose

Affirmed

Filed: May 17, 2013

Do Not Publish

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
Bledsoe v. State
178 S.W.3d 824 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)
Garner v. State
300 S.W.3d 763 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2009)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Jackson v. State
485 S.W.2d 553 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1972)
Gainous v. State
436 S.W.2d 137 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1969)
Currie v. State
516 S.W.2d 684 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bradric Givante Dwarren Fransaw v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bradric-givante-dwarren-fransaw-v-state-texapp-2013.