NUMBER 13-02-253-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
QUINCY TEAGUE, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
On appeal from the 88th District Court of Hardin County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Baird
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Baird
Appellant was charged by indictment with the offense of aggravated sexual assault. A jury convicted appellant of the charged offense and assessed his punishment at ten years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice–Institutional Division, probated, and a fine of $10,000. The jury further recommended that the confinement be suspended and that appellant be placed on community supervision for a period of ten years. We affirm.
Counsel has filed an Anders brief. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel states that he has reviewed the reporter’s record and the clerk’s record in this case, that he has researched the applicable statutory and decisional authority, and that he has found no reversible error and no arguable grounds of error for purposes of appeal. The State has not filed a brief. We find counsel has presented a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
Appellate counsel notified appellant of his right to review the court reporter’s and clerk’s records and to file a pro se brief. More than thirty days have passed, and appellant has not availed himself of this option.
We too have carefully reviewed the appellate record. After our initial review, we abated the appeal and remanded the case to the trial court for findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the voluntariness of appellant’s statement and the trial judge’s decision to allow the State to amend the indictment. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.22, § 6 (Vernon 1979 & Supp. 2004); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 28.10 (Vernon 1989). We have now reviewed those findings and conclusions, and have found no reversible error or any arguable points of error for appeal.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
In accordance with Anders, appellant’s attorney has asked permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. We grant the attorney’s motion to withdraw. We order appellant’s attorney to notify appellant of the disposition of this appeal and of the availability of discretionary review. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).
CHARLES BAIRD,
Justice
Do not publish.
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Memorandum opinion delivered and filed
this the 19th day of August, 2004.