Jason Sibley v. State
03-14-00631-CR
| Tex. App. | Aug 17, 2016Background
- Jason Sibley was tried by jury in Travis County for two counts of sexual assault (non-consensual vaginal and anal penetration) arising from an incident on February 2, 2013.
- Complainant Gabrielle Rhodes testified she was intoxicated, danced with Sibley at a club, pushed him away when he became aggressive, left the dance floor, encountered Sibley behind the club, and was then sexually assaulted (vaginal and anal).
- Multiple witnesses (club employees, friends) observed Rhodes and Sibley behind the club with Rhodes on the ground and Sibley on top of her; a sexual-assault nurse examiner found vaginal and anal injuries.
- Sibley admitted to vaginal intercourse with Rhodes but maintained it was consensual.
- The jury acquitted Sibley of non-consensual vaginal penetration but convicted him of non-consensual anal penetration; the trial court sentenced him to 24 years’ imprisonment.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief seeking withdrawal, asserting the appeal is frivolous; Sibley filed a pro se brief alleging defects in the indictment, jury charge, judgment, and ineffective assistance by appellate counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Sibley) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for anal penetration conviction | Conviction unsupported / trial errors in charge or indictment | Evidence (testimony, witnesses, injuries) supports conviction | Affirmed — record contains sufficient evidence; no arguable grounds for appeal |
| Validity of indictment, jury charge, and judgment | Indictment/charge/judgment contain various errors warranting reversal | Record and charge were legally sufficient; no reversible error shown | Affirmed — no arguable error in record |
| Effectiveness of appellate counsel for filing Anders brief | Counsel ineffective for submitting Anders brief instead of advocate brief | Anders procedure properly followed; counsel complied with requirements | Affirmed — Anders brief appropriate; counsel may withdraw |
| Whether appeal presents any nonfrivolous issues | Sibley’s pro se claims raise arguable issues | Thorough review shows no arguable issues to advance | Appeal is frivolous; counsel’s motion to withdraw granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (framework for counsel to seek withdrawal when appeal is frivolous)
- Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) (court-appointed counsel may be permitted to withdraw after a court independently reviews the record)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (standards for counsel and appellate review of frivolous appeals)
- Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974) (precedent on appellate counsel duties and review)
- Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972) (case law on appellate procedure and review)
- Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (procedures for providing the appellate record and advising indigent appellants under Anders)