Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 2, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-20-00289-CR AUSTEN LOPEZ, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 367th District Court Denton County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17-3042-367 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Austen Lopez appeals his convictions for indecency with a child and aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of 14 in multiple issues. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 21.11(a)(1); 22.021. We affirm.1 1 The Supreme Court of Texas ordered the Second Court of Appeals to transfer this case to this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 73.001. Under the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, “the court of appeals to which the case is transferred must decide the case in accordance with the precedent of the transferor court under principles of stare decisis if the transferee court’s decision otherwise would have been inconsistent with the precedent of the BACKGROUND2 At trial, the State’s first witness was A.L., the child complainant. A.L. lived in an apartment with her mother, I.G., two younger brothers, and appellant. A.L. was seven at the time the events at issue in this appeal occurred. A.L. testified that appellant touched her and made her feel uncomfortable. According to A.L., the first time appellant made her feel uncomfortable occurred when she was in her bedroom taking off her clothes before showering. Appellant entered the bedroom, put A.L. on her bed while she was naked, and took off his clothes. A.L. said appellant then “put his pee pee in mine” while she was on her back. A.L. used two dolls, representing a male and female, to explain how she and appellant were positioned when this episode occurred. A.L. also circled on a diagram of a girl and a boy what she meant when she used the term “my pee pee” and “his pee pee.” A.L. testified that both she and appellant were naked when appellant put “his pee pee” in hers. A.L. also testified that she felt something moving as appellant was on top of her. According to A.L., this movement caused her pain. A.L. told appellant to stop and appellant promised A.L. that he would not do it again. Appellant told A.L. not to tell her mother about the abuse. Despite appellant’s promise, he continued to sexually assault A.L. A.L. testified that appellant got on top of her while she was naked “maybe five times.” According to A.L., appellant also asked her to touch his penis with her hand. A.L. testified that she touched appellant’s penis with her hand multiple times. The State next called I.G., A.L.’s mother, and the trial court conducted a transferor court.” Tex. R. App. P. 41.3. We are unaware of any conflict between the Second Court of Appeals precedent and that of this court on any relevant issue. 2 Because appellant has not challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions, we include only those facts necessary to provide background for his issues raised in this …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals