Opinion
No. 05-15-00177-CR No. 05-15-00178-CR
02-04-2016
CHARNEEQUA ANETASIA SHERRIA HUNTER, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. F13-53802-R, F14-59240-R
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Schenck
Opinion by Justice Bridges
Charneequa Anetasia Sherria Hunter appeals her conviction, following the adjudication of her guilt, for burglary of a building (cause no. 05-15-00177-CR) and her conviction for engaging in organized criminal activity (cause no. 05-15-00178-CR). See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 30.02(a); 71.02(a) (West 2011 & Supp. 2015). The trial court assessed punishment at one year's confinement in state jail on the burglary and four years' imprisonment on the engaging in organized criminal activity. On appeal, appellant's attorney filed briefs in which she concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The briefs meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The briefs present 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 briefs to appellant. We advised appellant of her right to file a pro se response, but she did not 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).
We have reviewed the record and counsel's briefs. 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 appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals.
Although not an arguable issue, we note the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt in cause no. 05-15-00177-CR incorrectly identifies the statute for the offense as "31.02 Penal Code." Appellant was convicted of burglary of a building under section 30.02 of the Texas Penal Code. Accordingly, we modify the judgment to show the statute for the offense is "30.02 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).
In cause no. 05-15-00177-CR, we affirm the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt as modified. In cause no. 05-15-00178-CR, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
/David L. Bridges/
DAVID L. BRIDGES
JUSTICE Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
150177F.U05
JUDGMENT
Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F13-53802-R.
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges, Justices Lang-Miers and Schenck participating.
Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt is MODIFIED as follows:
The section entitled "Statute for Offense" is modified to show "30.02 Penal Code."
As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt.
Judgment entered February 4, 2016
JUDGMENT
Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F14-59240-R).
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges, Justices Lang-Miers and Schenck participating.
Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the trial court's judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered February 4, 2016.