David James Brown v. The State of Texas Appeal from County Court at Law No 5 of Montgomery County (memorandum opinion by chief justice mckeithen)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
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STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice Submitted on December 12, 2016 Opinion Delivered January 18, 2017 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, J.J. 1 Brown may challenge our decision in these cases by filing a petition for discretionary review.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
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.
