Opinion
No. 05-15-01031-CR
01-27-2016
LESTER JAMES HART, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F14-31207-I
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Fillmore, Myers, and Whitehill
Opinion by Justice Whitehill
Lester James Hart waived a jury and pleaded guilty to fraudulent use or possession of identifying information in an amount of ten or more but less fifty items. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 32.51(b), (c)(3) (West Supp. 2015). The trial court assessed punishment, enhanced by a prior felony conviction, at thirty years' imprisonment. See id. §§ 12.33, 12.42(b) (West 2011). On appeal, appellant's attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases). Appellant filed a pro se response raising two issues.
We have reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and appellant's pro se response. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court's duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
Although not an arguable issue, we note the trial court's judgment of conviction reflects that the statute for the offense is "32.51(C)(3) Penal Code." However, the offense for which appellant was convicted includes both subsections (b)(1) and (c)(3) of the penal code. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN, § 32.51(b)(1), (c)(3) (West Supp. 2015). Accordingly, we modify the section of the judgment entitled "Statute for Offense" to state "Section 32.51(b)(1), (c)(3) Penal Code." See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529-30 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd).
We affirm the trial court's judgment as modified. Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
151031F.U05
/Bill Whitehill/
BILL WHITEHILL
JUSTICE
JUDGMENT
Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F14-31207-I).
Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill, Justices Fillmore and Myers participating.
Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the trial court's judgment is MODIFIED as follows:
The section entitled "Statute for Offense" is modified to state "Section 32.51(b)(1), (c)(3) Penal Code."
As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court's judgment.
Judgment entered January 27, 2016.