Brandon Lewis v. State

NO. 07-08-0035-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL E

JULY 31, 2008

______________________________

BRANDON LEWIS,

                                                                                                 Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                                                                                                 Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 137^TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

NO. 2006-412,546; HON. JIM BOB DARNELL, PRESIDING

_______________________________

                                                       Memorandum Opinion

                                         _______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., HANCOCK, J., and BOYD, S.J.

          Brandon Lewis appeals from his conviction of four counts of aggravated sexual assault. He entered open pleas of guilty and, after a trial on punishment, was sentenced to ten years confinement on each count.

          Appellant’s appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, together with an Anders brief, wherein he certifies that, after diligently searching the record, he concluded that appellant’s appeal is without merit. Along with his brief, he has filed a copy of a letter sent to appellant informing him of counsel’s belief that there was no reversible error and of appellant’s right to file a response pro se. By letter dated June 27, 2008, this court also notified appellant of his right to file his own response by July 28, 2008, if he wished to do so. To date, no response or request for extension of time to file a response has been received.

          In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel discussed several potential areas for appeal including jurisdictional defects, the voluntariness of appellant’s plea, the evidence to support the guilty pleas, and error with respect to punishment. Upon his final analysis, counsel determined that no reversible error existed. Thereafter, we conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of appellate counsel’s conclusions and to uncover any error, reversible or otherwise, pursuant to Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) and concluded the same.

          Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted and the judgments are affirmed.

                                                                           Brian Quinn

                                                                          Chief Justice

Do not publish.