Brandon Marchelle Lee v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 20, 2022
• Docket: 11-22-00059-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion filed October 20, 2022

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals __________

No. 11-22-00059-CR __________

BRANDON MARCHELLE LEE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 266th District Court Erath County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CR15415

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Brandon Marchelle Lee, waived his right to a jury trial and pled guilty to the first-degree felony offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.021(a)(1)(B), (a)(2)(B) (West 2019). The trial court accepted Appellant’s plea, found him guilty of the offense as charged, and ordered a presentence investigation report. Three months later, the trial court held a punishment hearing—at which it considered not only the presentence investigation report, but also the testimony of eleven witnesses—and assessed Appellant’s punishment at imprisonment for fifty-four years. We affirm. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed in this court 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 the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Counsel provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, a copy of the motion to withdraw, an explanatory letter, and a copy of the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record. 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 petition for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seeking review by that court. 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.1 We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

October 20, 2022 PER CURIAM Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

1 We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. 2