Brian Scott Barton v. State of Texas--Appeal from 58th District Court of Jefferson County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 11-07-00113-CR

Case Date: 08/16/2007

Plaintiff: 1996 Ford Texas License 864 MVT, Ramon Gomez

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from 170th District Court of McLennan County

Preview:Brian Scott Barton v. State of Texas--Appeal from 58th
District Court of Jefferson County
Opinion filed August 16, 2007
Opinion filed August 16, 2007
In The
Eleventh Court of Appeals
No. 11-07-00113-CR
BRIAN SCOTT BARTON, Appellant
V.
STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 58th District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 93941
O P I N I O N
The jury convicted Brian Scott Barton of aggravated assault, found that a deadly weapon was used or exhibited in the
commission of the offense, and found both enhancement allegations to be true. The jury assessed his punishment at
confinement for thirty years. We affirm.
Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which
counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that she has concluded
that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of his right
to review the record and file a response to counsel=s brief. A response has not been filed. Court-appointed counsel has
complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex.
App.CEastland 2005, no pet.).
Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal
is without merit. We note that the victim testified that appellant stabbed him twice in his stomach with a serrated knife
that was curved like a claw or talon.
Counsel has the responsibility to advise appellant that he may file a petition for discretionary review by the Texas
Court of Criminal Appeals. Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Likewise, this court advises
appellant that he may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 66. Black v. State, 217 S.W.3d
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/8729.html[8/20/2013 7:29:50 PM]

687 (Tex. App.CEastland 2007, no pet.).
The motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
August 16, 2007
Do not publish. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,
McCall, J., and Strange, J.
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/8729.html[8/20/2013 7:29:50 PM]

Download 8729.pdf