Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2004

Robert Earl Warrick, Jr. v. State

Robert Earl Warrick, Jr. v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided July 28, 2004

Robert Earl Warrick, Jr. v. State

Opinion

Robert Earl Warrick Jr. v. State






IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS


No. 10-03-00158-CR


     ROBERT EARL WARRICK, JR.,

                                                                              Appellant

     v.


     THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                                                                              Appellee


From the 177th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court # 911,447

                                                                                                                

MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                                                                                                

      Appellant Robert Earl Warrick, Jr. was convicted of indecency with a child and sentenced to ten years in prison. Appellant’s counsel filed an Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We will affirm.

      The brief thoroughly reviews the (1) indictment and statutes under which Appellant was charged, (2) the waiver of a trial by jury, (3) the sufficiency of the admonishments, (4) the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction, and (5) the punishment assessed. In the brief, counsel states that he “has diligently reviewed the record in this case” and that he is unable to find any error which he, in good faith, can urge as warranting a reversal of the judgment. See id. at 744. The State filed a waiver of its right to file a brief.

      We have conducted an independent review of the record to discover whether there are arguable grounds for appeal. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We determine that there are none. The indictment and motion to revoke invoked the district court’s jurisdiction, and that court assessed punishment within the range of punishment for the offense based on Appellant’s plea bargain.

      Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. Counsel must advise Appellant of our decision and of his right to file a petition for discretionary review. See Sowels v. State, 45 S.W.3d 690, 694 (Tex. App.—Waco 2001, no pet.).

 

                                                                   BILL VANCE

                                                                   Justice



Before Chief Justice Gray,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice Reyna

      (Chief Justice Gray dissenting)

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed July 28, 2004

Publish

[CR25]

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.