WILLIAM ELMER HASTINGS v. THE STATE OF TEXAS (2011)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice Francis

William Elmer Hastings appeals his convictions for aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years of age.   See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 22.021(a)(1)(A)(i), (2)(B) & (a)(1)(A)(ii), (2)(B) (West Supp.2010).   On appeal, appellant's attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit.   The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).   The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance.   See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1978).   Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant and advised him of his right to file a pro se response.   We also advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response.

Appellant filed a pro se response raising the sufficiency of the evidence to support the convictions.   We are not, however, required to review the merits of claims raised in a pro se response.   See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex.Crim.App.2005).   Rather, it is our duty to determine whether there are any arguable issues, and, if so, to remand the case to the trial court so new counsel may be appointed to address those issues.  Id.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief.   We agree the appeals are frivolous and without merit.   We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals.   We note, however, that the judgment in trial court cause number F09–00729–V (appellate cause number 05–10–00265–CR) incorrectly states the victim was 5 years old at the time of the offense.   The record shows the victim was 13 years old at the time of this offense.   We modify the trial court's judgment in cause number F09–00729–V to reflect the victim was 13 years old at the time of the offense.   See Tex.R.App. P. 43.2(b);  Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27–28 (Tex.Crim.App.1993);  Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529–30 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd).

In cause number 05–10–00264–CR, we affirm the trial court's judgment.   In cause number 05–10–00265–CR, we affirm the trial court's judgment as modified.

MOLLY FRANCIS JUSTICE