Opinion
NO. 14-19-00957-CR NO. 14-19-00982-CR
09-01-2020
JARRET ALEXANDER ROBISON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 179th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 1594979 and 1594978
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant was previously placed on two-years deferred adjudication community supervision for the offenses of (1) possession of marihuana weighing more than five ounces but less than five pounds and (2) possession of methamphetamine weighing less than one gram. The State moved to adjudicate in each case, and the trial court found appellant guilty in each case and sentenced him to two-years in state jail for each offence, to run concurrently. Furthermore, the trial court in each case ordered, "APPEAL WAIVED, NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED," but the trial court's certification of the defendant's right to appeal in each case stated it "Is not a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has the right of appeal."
Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal in each case is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record in each case and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record in each case and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60 days have passed, and no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record in each case and counsel's brief and agree the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
The judgment in each case contains errors. As noted above, the trial court in each case ordered, "APPEAL WAIVED, NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED," but the trial court's certification of the defendant's right to appeal in each case stated it "Is not a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has the right of appeal." Further, the record reflects appellant entered a plea of "not true" to the motion to adjudicate guilt but the judgment in both cases incorrectly states the plea was "true." Accordingly, we modify the trial court's judgment in each case to reflect appellant did not waive the right to appeal and appellant pleaded "true" to the first enhancement paragraph. See French v. State, 830 S.W.2d 607, 609 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (applying former 1986 Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 80(b) and stating appellate court has authority to reform a judgment to "speak the truth"). In an appeal in which counsel has filed an Anders brief, we are not required to abate the appeal for appointment of new counsel if the judgment may be modified See Ferguson v. State, 435 S.W.3d 291, 295 (Tex. App.—Waco 2014, no pet.) (modifying judgment in Anders appeal to correct age of child complainant); Bray v. State, 179 S.W.3d 725, 730 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005, no pet.) (modifying judgment in Anders appeal to delete improper condition of parole.
As modified, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed. Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b).
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Spain.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).