Anthony James Watson v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 232nd District Court of Harris County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued August 26, 2008 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ____________ NO. 01- 08-00219-CR ____________ ANTHONY JAMES WATSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 232nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1062513 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Anthony James Watson, was convicted by a jury of the offense of sexual assault, and assessed punishment at confinement for 10 years probated for five years. After being placed on community supervision, the State filed a motion to revoke probation alleging that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his probation. Appellant pleaded true to three of the four allegations in the State s motions. After hearing evidence, the trial court found true the allegations contained in the State s motion and revoked appellant s community supervision. The trial court assessed punishment at confinement for 10 years. Appellant gave notice of appeal. Appellant s counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error, that the appeal is without merit and is frivolous, and that the appeal must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel represents that he has served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of her right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. Having reviewed the record and counsel s brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 2 We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel s motion to withdraw.1 PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Taft, Jennings, and Bland. . Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 1 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that she may, on her own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 3
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.
