William James Akin v. The State of Texas Appeal from 336th District Court of Fannin County (memorandum opinion by chief justice iii morriss)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana No. 06-14-00181-CR WILLIAM JAMES AKIN, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 336th District Court Fannin County, Texas Trial Court No. CR-13-24979 Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss MEMORANDUM OPINION William James Akin was convicted by a Fannin County jury in this case of indecency with a child by sexual contact1 and assessed punishment of twenty years’ imprisonment. This case was tried with three companion cases, which are the subject of other appeals pending before this Court.2 Akin filed a single, consolidated brief covering all four appeals, in which he contends that the trial court erred (1) in admitting two photographs of adult pornographic websites and two photographs of internet search history pages and (2) in granting the State’s challenge of a juror for cause. The arguments raised in this appeal are based exclusively on the arguments brought before this Court in the companion appeal styled Akin v. State, cause number 06-14-00178-CR. In our opinion of this date disposing of that appeal, we found that (1) although the trial court erred, there was no reversible error in the admission of the complained-of evidence and (2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the State’s challenge for cause. For the reasons set forth in that opinion, we likewise overrule Akin’s points of error as they apply to this appeal. 1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 21.11(a)(1), (c)(2) (West 2011). 2 In his companion cause numbers, 06-14-00178, 06-14-00179, and 06-14-00180, Akin appeals from his convictions of one count of sexual assault of a child and two counts of indecency with a child by sexual contact. 2 We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Josh R. Morriss III Chief Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: August 10, 2015 September 16, 2015 Do Not Publish 3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.
