Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves an appeal by Christopher Matthew Davis following his conviction for sexual assault, where he was accused by a Smith County grand jury of penetrating a child under the age of seventeen. During the trial, Davis entered a plea of not guilty, and one of the charges was subsequently dropped by the State. Ultimately, the jury convicted Davis on the remaining charge, sentencing him to ten years in prison and imposing a $5,000 fine. On appeal, Davis's counsel submitted an Anders brief, asserting that no arguable issues for appeal were present after a thorough review of the appellate record. The appellate court agreed, finding no reversible error, and deemed the appeal frivolous, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and granting the counsel's motion to withdraw. Davis was informed of his right to pursue a discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, including the procedure and deadline for filing such a petition. The decision was delivered by a panel of three justices and the case was marked as 'DO NOT PUBLISH.'
Legal Issues Addressed
Appeals and Anders Briefssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: In this case, the appellant's counsel filed an Anders brief, indicating that after a comprehensive examination of the appellate record, no arguable issues for appeal were found, which led to the dismissal of the appeal.
Reasoning: Davis's counsel filed an Anders brief, stating that after a thorough review of the appellate record, no arguable issues for appeal were identified.
Review of Appellate Record for Reversible Errorsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reviewed the appellate record and found no reversible error, agreeing with the counsel's assessment of the appeal as frivolous.
Reasoning: The court, upon reviewing the record, found no reversible error and concurred with counsel's assessment that the appeal was frivolous.
Right to Seek Discretionary Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant was informed of his right to file for discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, including guidance on the timeline for filing.
Reasoning: Davis was advised of his right to seek discretionary review from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and was instructed on the procedures for doing so, including the 30-day deadline for filing any such petition.