TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-96-00171-CR
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
NO. 8389, HONORABLE HAROLD R. TOWSLEE, JUDGE PRESIDING
The district court found appellant guilty of three counts of indecency with a child and assessed punishment for each at imprisonment for fifteen years. Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by advancing two contentions which counsel says might arguably support the appeal. 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). We have reviewed these arguable points and agree with counsel that neither was preserved for review.
Appellant has filed a pro se brief in which he complains of insufficient evidence, a Fifth Amendment violation, and ineffective assistance of counsel. We find the complainant's testimony sufficient to sustain the conviction. There is no indication in the record that any prejudicial evidence was obtained in violation of the Fifth Amendment. And the only alleged error by trial counsel, his statement to the court that appellant "did something illegal," came at the punishment hearing after the court had found appellant guilty. In context, counsel was urging the court to consider the mitigating evidence in determining punishment. No error is presented in the pro se brief.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Before Justices Powers, Jones and Kidd
Affirmed
Filed: March 20, 1997
Do Not Publish