Roy Alton Edmondson Jr. v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 33rd District Court of San Saba County

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-04-00431-CR Roy Alton Edmondson, Jr., Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAN SABA COUNTY, 33RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 4977, HONORABLE GUILFORD L. JONES, III, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION In March 1997, appellant Roy Alton Edmondson, Jr., pleaded guilty to the aggravated sexual assault of a child. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.021 (West Supp. 2004-05). The district court deferred adjudication and placed appellant on community supervision. In May 2004, after a hearing on the State s motion to adjudicate, the court adjudged appellant guilty and sentenced him to thirty-five years in prison. 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 presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. 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). Appellant received a copy of counsel s brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed. We have reviewed the record and counsel s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. __________________________________________ David Puryear, Justice Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson and Puryear Affirmed Filed: June 23, 2005 Do Not Publish 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.