In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
________________
NO. 09-16-00100-CR
NO. 09-16-00101-CR
________________
DAVID JAMES BROWN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
________________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5
Montgomery County, Texas
Trial Cause Nos. 14-295457, 14-295560
________________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement in two separate cases involving the same
victim, appellant David James Brown pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor offense of
indecent exposure. In each case, the trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Brown
guilty, but deferred further proceedings, placed Brown on community supervision for two
years, and assessed a fine of $1000. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke
Brown’s unadjudicated community supervision in each case. In both cases, Brown pleaded
“not true” to nine violations of the conditions of his community supervision. The trial court
1
conducted an evidentiary hearing, and in each case, the trial court found that Brown
violated several conditions of his community supervision, found Brown guilty of indecent
exposure, and assessed punishment at 150 days in jail. The trial court ordered that Brown’s
sentences were to run concurrently.
Brown’s appellate counsel filed briefs that present counsel’s professional evaluation
of the record and conclude the appeals are frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On September 6, 2016,
we granted an extension of time for Brown to file pro se briefs. We received no response
from Brown in either case.
We have reviewed the appellate records, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion
that no arguable issues support the appeals. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order
appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeals. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503,
511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgments of conviction.1
AFFIRMED.
______________________________
STEVE McKEITHEN
Chief Justice
Submitted on December 12, 2016
Opinion Delivered January 18, 2017
Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, J.J.
1
Brown may challenge our decision in these cases by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
2