Donald DeWayne Freier v. The State of Texas--Appeal from Crim Dist Ct 3 of Tarrant County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-99-098-CR

&

No. 10-99-099-CR

DONALD DeWAYNE FREIER,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the Criminal District Court No. 3

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 0692642D & 0692647D

O P I N I O N

Appellant Freier appeals two separate convictions for sexual assault of a child under seventeen years of age. Both cases were tried together. There is one reporter's record and the briefs in each case are identical.

On January 21, 1999, Appellant judicially confessed and entered guilty pleas to the offense charged in each indictment.

On March 8, 1999, the court, after reviewing a pre-sentence investigation report and hearing testimony, found Appellant guilty in both cases and sentenced him in each case to twenty years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. Appellant's court-appointed counsel on appeal has filed a brief in each case in which he details the evidence, and in which he concludes that the record contains no reversible error, and that the appeal in each is without merit and is frivolous.

Appellant's briefs meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 907 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for reversal.

Appellant's briefs point out that Appellant's judicial confession and plea of guilty in each case admits all facts charged in the indictments, and that all non-jurisdictional defects were waived. Shaldhorn v. State, 732 S.W.2d 636 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987. Counsel further states that there is nothing in the record to support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Ex parte McWilliams, 634 S.W.2d 815 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982). Appellant's counsel further notes that there is nothing to indicate the pleas were not voluntarily and knowingly entered by Appellant as open pleas. Brown v. State, 943 S.W.2d 35 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).

The judge assessed punishment within the statutory range of punishment. The judgments are regular on their face and contain all requirements set out in the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, article 42.01.

Appellant's briefs certify that copies were served on Appellant on June 2, 1999. Appellant has filed no pro se briefs and no extension of time in which to file same has been requested.

We have examined both briefs and agree that both appeals are frivolous and without merit, and we find nothing in the record that might arguably support an appeal.

Appellant's appointed counsel has further made a request and motion to withdraw as attorney in each case. Those motions are granted.

Judgments in both cases are affirmed.

FRANK G. McDONALD

Chief Justice (Retired)

Before Chief Justice Davis,

Justice Vance and

Chief Justice McDonald (Retired)

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed September 15, 1999

Do not publish