Rex Carlton Crowder Jr. v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 18, 2011
Docket03-10-00256-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Rex Carlton Crowder Jr. v. State (Rex Carlton Crowder Jr. 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
Rex Carlton Crowder Jr. v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-10-00256-CR

Rex Carlton Crowder, Jr., Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. CR-08-122, HONORABLE JACK H. ROBISON, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found appellant Rex Carlton Crowder guilty of two counts of indecency with

a child by contact and assessed punishment for each count at fifteen years’ imprisonment and a

$10,000 fine. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 21.11 (West 2011). The trial court rendered judgment

on each count, ordering the sentences to run concurrently.

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

brief concluding that the 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). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See

Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No pro se brief has been filed.

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. Counsel’s motion to withdraw

is granted.

The judgments of conviction are affirmed.

__________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Henson and Goodwin

Affirmed

Filed: August 18, 2011

Do Not Publish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)
Rex Carlton Crowder Jr. v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rex-carlton-crowder-jr-v-state-texapp-2011.