Douglas Edward Gosby Jr. v. State

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-18-00041-CR
____________________
DOUGLAS EDWARD GOSBY JR., Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
__________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 128th District Court
Orange County, Texas
Trial Cause No. A170334-R
__________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Douglas Edward Gosby Jr. was indicted for sexual assault of a
child, a second-degree felony. Gosby waived his right to a jury trial and pleaded
guilty to sexual assault of a child in an open plea. After conducting a sentencing
hearing, the trial court sentenced Gosby to twelve years of confinement and also
assessed a $1000 fine.
Gosby’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional
evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.
1
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.
1978). On April 30, 2018, we granted an extension of time for Gosby to file a pro se
brief, and Gosby filed a pro se response. The Court of Criminal Appeals has held
that we need not address the merits of issues raised in an Anders brief or a pro se
response. Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Rather,
an appellate court may determine: (1) “that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue
an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error[;]”
or (2) “that arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court
so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues.” Id.
We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion
that no arguable issues support an appeal. See id. Therefore, we find it unnecessary
to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813
S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1
AFFIRMED.
______________________________
STEVE McKEITHEN
Chief Justice
Submitted on June 26, 2018
Opinion Delivered July 25, 2018
Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.
1
Gosby may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
2