Nelson, Willie Cannon v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 27, 2003
Docket14-02-01006-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Nelson, Willie Cannon v. State (Nelson, Willie Cannon 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
Nelson, Willie Cannon v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion filed March 27, 2003

Affirmed and Opinion filed March 27, 2003.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-02-01006-CR

WILLIE CANNON NELSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 232nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 591,943

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child after a jury trial and sentenced to confinement for forty-five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice on June 19, 1991.  Appellant later filed a motion for forensic DNA testing under Chapter 64 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.  On August 23, 2002, after a hearing, the trial court entered written findings of fact and conclusions of law and denied the application.  Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.


Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed March 27, 2003.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Brister and Justices Fowler and Edelman.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

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)
Stafford v. State
813 S.W.2d 503 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Nelson, Willie Cannon v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-willie-cannon-v-state-texapp-2003.