In one indictment, Appellant was charged with aggravated sexual assault and indecency with a child. A jury found Appellant guilty of both offenses and assessed punishment at confinement for forty years for aggravated sexual assault and twenty years for indecency with a child. Appellant filed a notice of appeal. In his appellate brief, Appellant raised some evidentiary issues, the effectiveness of his counsel, and the legal sufficiency of the aggravated sexual assault conviction.
The Court of Appeals found that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the
aggravated sexual assault conviction. Sessums v. State, No. 06-02-00149-CR (Tex. App-
Texarkana, delivered June 27, 2003). The Court of Appeals determined that it did not need to address Appellant's remaining issues because Appellant did not make any specific arguments concerning the conviction for indecency with a child. Appellant filed a petition for discretionary review alleging that the Court of Appeals erred in refusing to address the remaining issues as they pertain to the conviction for indecency with a child.
The cause number, which applies to both convictions, is shown on the appellate brief. Although the brief does not specifically mention the indecency with a child conviction, the remaining issues apply equally to both convictions because the offenses were tried in the same trial and had the same cause number. Further, Appellant stated in oral argument that he was appealing both convictions. Id. Slip op. at 7. As required by Rule 38.9 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, briefs must be construed liberally. Therefore, we conclude that the Court of Appeals should have addressed the remaining issues with regard to the indecency with a child conviction. Tex.R.App.P. 38.9.
Therefore, we grant Appellant's petition for discretionary review, vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and remand the case to that court for consideration of Appellant's remaining issues. Tex.R.App.P. 47.1.
Date Delivered: November 26, 2003
Do Not Publish