<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="WordPerfect 9">
<TITLE></TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY TEXT="#000000" LINK="#0000ff" VLINK="#551a8b" ALINK="#ff0000" BGCOLOR="#c0c0c0">

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-size: 14pt"><STRONG><CENTER>TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN</STRONG></SPAN><STRONG></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><HR ALIGN="CENTER" WIDTH="26%">
</STRONG></P>
<CENTER>NO. 03-9<A NAME="1">7</A>-00<A NAME="2">675</A>-CR</CENTER>


<P><STRONG><HR ALIGN="CENTER" WIDTH="26%">
</STRONG></P>


<CENTER><A NAME="3">Abraham Nathan Williams</A>, Appellant</CENTER>


<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>v.</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>The State of Texas, Appellee</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><HR SIZE="3">
</STRONG></P>
<SPAN STYLE="font-size: 11pt"><STRONG><CENTER>FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF <A NAME="4">TOM GREEN</A> COUNTY, <A NAME="5">119TH</A> JUDICIAL DISTRICT</CENTER>
</STRONG></SPAN>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-size: 11pt"><STRONG><CENTER>NO. <A NAME="6">B-97-0085-S</A>, HONORABLE <A NAME="7">DICK ALCALA</A>, JUDGE PRESIDING</STRONG></SPAN><STRONG></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<P><STRONG><HR SIZE="3">
</STRONG></P>


PER CURIAM

<P>A jury found appellant guilty of aggravated sexual assault of a child and assessed
punishment at imprisonment for thirty-five years.  Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief
concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of <EM>Anders v.
California</EM>, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by advancing two contentions which counsel says might arguably
support the appeal.  <EM>See also</EM> <EM>Penson v. Ohio</EM>, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); <EM>High v. State</EM>, 573 S.W.2d 807
(Tex. Crim. App. 1978); <EM>Currie v. State</EM>, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); <EM>Jackson v. State</EM>,
485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); <EM>Gainous v. State</EM>, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). 
A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the
appellate record and to file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.</P>

<P>We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and
without merit.  One of the two arguable points, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, is clearly without
merit.  The complaining witness's testimony alone is sufficient to support the conviction as a matter of law. 
<SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times"><EM>See Jackson v. Virginia</EM>, 443 U.S. 307 (1979); <EM>Geesa v. State</EM>, 820 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991); <EM>Griffin v. State</EM>, 614 S.W.2d 155 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981).  The evidence is also factually sufficient
when all the testimony is considered equally.  <EM>See</EM> <EM>Clewis v. State</EM> 922 S.W.2d 126, 129 (Tex. Crim. App.
1996); <EM>Orona v. State</EM>, 836 S.W.2d 319, 321 (Tex. App.--Austin 1992, no pet.). </SPAN><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times Regular">The other arguable
point, that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance, is not supported by the record.</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times Regular">The judgment of conviction is affirmed.</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times Regular">Before Chief Justice Yeakel, Justices Aboussie and Jones</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times Regular">Affirmed</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times Regular">Filed:   May 21, 1998</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times Regular">Do Not Publish</SPAN></P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
