Opinion
No. 09-08-00415-CR
Submitted on August 11, 2009.
Opinion Delivered August 26, 2009. DO NOT PUBLISH.
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court Jefferson County, Texas, Trial Cause No. 96850.
Before McKEITHEN, C.J., GAULTNEY and HORTON, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Deonta Jamion Richard pled guilty to robbery. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Richard guilty, but deferred further proceedings, placed Richard on community supervision for eight years, and assessed a fine of $1000. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Richard's unadjudicated community supervision. Richard pled "true" to two violations of the conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found that Richard violated the conditions of his community supervision, found Richard guilty of robbery, and assessed punishment at seven years of confinement. Richard's appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel's professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On April 30, 2009, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from appellant. We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We note that in the section entitled "Statute for Offense[,]" the trial court's judgment incorrectly recites "29.03(a)(2) Penal Code." See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 29.03(a)(2) (Vernon 2003) (aggravated robbery). We delete this language and substitute "29.02 Penal Code" in its place. See id. § 29.02 (robbery). We affirm the trial court's judgment as reformed. AFFIRMED AS REFORMED.
Richard was indicted for aggravated robbery, but he pled guilty to the lesser-included offense of robbery.
Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.