In Re Commitment of Bryan Joseph Layton Appeal from 435th District Court of Montgomery County (memorandum opinion )

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-15-00217-CV _________________ IN RE COMMITMENT OF BRYAN JOSEPH LAYTON ________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 435th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 14-08-08849-CV ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury found that Bryan Joseph Layton suffers from a behavioral abnormality that predisposes him to engage in a predatory act of sexual violence. The trial court rendered a final judgment and an order of civil commitment. We affirm the trial court’s judgment and order of civil commitment. After perfecting appeal, Layton’s appointed appellate counsel filed a brief certifying that the appeal is frivolous. Appellate counsel’s brief presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and asks this Court to accept the Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Commitment of Rayson, No. 09-06-081-CV, 2007 WL 846555, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Mar. 22, 2007, no 1 pet.) (mem. op.). On October 9, 2015, we granted leave to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief or other response has been filed. We have reviewed the record and determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. The Anders brief filed by appellate counsel adequately presents the case, and additional briefing will not aid in the satisfactory submission of the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.9. We find no arguable error requiring further action in this case. We affirm the trial court’s judgment and order of civil commitment. AFFIRMED. ______________________________ CHARLES KREGER Justice Submitted on January 11, 2016 Opinion Delivered February 11, 2016 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 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.