Jacob Wayne Peek v. the State of Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-24-00732-CR

Jacob Wayne PEEK,
Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,
Appellee

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas
Trial Court No. CRW2205120
Honorable Jennifer Dillingham, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Irene Rios, Justice

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
Irene Rios, Justice
Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 22, 2026

AFFIRMED

Appellant Jacob Wayne Peek entered an open plea of no contest/nolo contendere and

signed written plea admonishments, waivers, and a judicial confession of guilt for committing

indecency with a child by sexual contact. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced

Peek to twenty years’ imprisonment. Peek appeals. 1

1
During a combined plea proceeding, Peek also plead no contest/nolo contendere to the aggravated sexual assault of
a child pursuant to a plea agreement with the State in exchange for its recommendation to the trial court to cap his
punishment at thirty years in prison. After accepting the plea agreement, the trial court sentenced Peek to thirty years’
04-24-00732-CR

Peek’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief and motion to withdraw in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). With citations to the record and legal

authority, counsel’s brief explains why no arguable points of error exist for review and concludes

that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. See id. at 744-45; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807

(Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

The brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a professional evaluation showing

why there is no basis to advance an appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744–45; High, 573 S.W.2d at

812–13. In compliance with the requirements of Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App.

2014), counsel certified that he served copies of the brief and motion to withdraw on Peek and

informed Peek of his right to review, the procedure for obtaining the record, and file a pro se brief.

This court subsequently set a deadline for Peek to file a pro se brief. Peek then requested a copy

of the record, which this court provided to him. Subsequently, Peek filed a pro se brief, and the

State filed a brief in response.

We have reviewed the appellate record, the Anders brief, Peek’s pro se brief, and the State’s

brief. We conclude that there are no arguable grounds for appeal, and the appeal is wholly frivolous

and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (noting

court of appeals should not address merits of issues raised in Anders brief or pro se response but

should only determine if the appeal is frivolous). Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial

court and grant appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-

86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—

San Antonio 1996, no pet.).

imprisonment for the aggravated sexual assault of a child. The trial court ordered Peek’s twenty-year sentence for
indecency with a child by sexual contact herein to run consecutively to his thirty-year sentence for the aggravated
sexual assault of a child. Peek’s aggravated sexual assault of a child conviction is not at issue in this appeal; and
therefore, we do not address it any further.

-2-
04-24-00732-CR

No substitute counsel will be appointed. 2 Should Peek wish to seek further review by the

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for

discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary

review must be filed within thirty days from either the date of this opinion or from “the day the

last timely motion for rehearing or timely motion for en banc reconsideration was overruled by the

court of appeals.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed

with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.3. Any petition for

discretionary review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of

Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4.

Irene Rios, Justice

DO NOT PUBLISH

2
We also deny Peek’s November 14, 2025 motion for appointment of new counsel.

-3-