In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
______________________________
No. 06-09-00047-CR ______________________________
CLARENCE WESLEY HALEY, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District Court Lamar County, Texas Trial Court No. 22883
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A Lamar County jury found Clarence Wesley Haley guilty of failing to register as a sex offender. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 62.102 (Vernon 2006). (1) The trial court sentenced Haley, as an habitual offender, to forty-five years' imprisonment. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 12.32(c)(1), 12.42(c) (Vernon Supp. 2008).
In a companion appeal, cause number 06-09-00046-CR, also before this Court, Haley appeals his second conviction for failing to register as a sex offender. In that case, Haley was also sentenced to forty-five years' imprisonment. The sentences are to run concurrently. In cause number 06-09-00046-CR, Haley raises one additional issue--that the indictment was fundamentally defective.
Because the issues raised in each appeal are otherwise identical, for the reasons stated in our opinion dated this day in Haley v. State, cause number 06-09-00046-CR, we reform the judgment of the trial court to reflect the degree of offense to be a third-degree felony.
We affirm the judgment, as reformed.
Josh R. Morriss, III
Chief Justice
Date Submitted: October 8, 2009
Date Decided: October 16, 2009
Do Not Publish
1. The statute on the judgment listed Section 62.10 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure as the statute for the offense. This statute was redesignated as Article 62.102 effective September 1, 2005.
>
|
|
In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
______________________________
No. 06-09-00112-CR
______________________________
DAVID HEATH FOUSE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 8th Judicial District Court
Hopkins County, Texas
Trial Court No. 0820360
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley
MEMORANDUM OPINION
David Heath Fouse has filed an appeal from six convictions. Three are for the first-degree felony of aggravated sexual assault on a child (under fourteenB.P.), and three are for the second-degree felony of sexual assault on a child (under seventeenR.R. and C.J.). A single brief has been filed to address all six appeals. Fouse testified at trial. He admitted that he was convicted in 1999 of the felony offense of assault on a peace officer and the state-jail felony offense of burglary of a building, and admitted having sexual intercourse with B.P. and C.J.
This appeal is from his conviction for aggravated sexual assault on a child, on B.P. There are no issues raised or argument made concerning this conviction. When a point of error is inadequately briefed, we will not address it. Vuong v. State, 830 S.W.2d 929 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). This situation goes one step beyond simple inadequate briefing. Points are not merely inadequately briefed, they are not raised at all. This Court is not the appellants advocate. Although we have an interest in a just adjudication, we also have an interest in remaining impartial. Ex parte Lowery, 840 S.W.2d 550, 552 n.1 (Tex. App.Dallas 1992), revd on other grounds, 867 S.W.2d 41 (Tex. 1993). Thus, we will not brief a defendants case for him. Heiselbetz v. State, 906 S.W.2d 500, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995); see Busby v. State, 253 S.W.3d 661, 673 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); see Lawton v. State, 913 S.W.2d 542, 554 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995), overruled on other grounds by Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d 249 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).
Further, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has explicitly held that an appellate court cannot reverse a case on a theory not presented to the trial court or raised on appeal. Gerron v. State, 97 S.W.3d 597 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); Hailey v. State, 87 S.W.3d 118 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002). With no arguments or theories to support a request for reversal being made in connection with this conviction on appeal, there is nothing before this Court which we may review.
We affirm the judgment.
Bailey C. Moseley
Justice
Date Submitted: April 28, 2010
Date Decided: April 29, 2010
Do Not Publish