From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Apr 17, 2017
No. 05-16-00629-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 17, 2017)

Opinion

No. 05-16-00629-CR

04-17-2017

DEWAYNE LAMAR JONES, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F10-52961-N

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Stoddart
Opinion by Justice Stoddart

Dewayne Lamar Jones appeals his conviction, following adjudication of his guilt, for burglary of a habitation. The trial court assessed punishment at two years' imprisonment. On appeal, appellant's attorney filed a brief in which she 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. 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 several issues regarding his claim the indictment erroneously alleged he committed burglary of a habitation with intent to commit aggravated sexual assault. The trial court investigated appellant's claim during proceedings on the State's motion to adjudicate and found it baseless. We find nothing in the record that supports appellant's claim.

After reviewing counsel's brief, appellant's pro se response, and the record, we agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court's duty in Anders cases). We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

Although not an arguable issue, we note the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt contains two errors. The record shows appellant pleaded not true to the allegations in the State's motion to adjudicate. The judgment, however, reflects appellant pleaded true to the motion to adjudicate and the terms of a plea bargain were "2 years penitentiary Fine $-0-." Accordingly, on our own motion, we modify the section of the judgment entitled "plea to motion to adjudicate" to show "not true" and the section entitled "terms of plea bargain" to show "N/A." See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Estrada v. State, 334 S.W.3d 57, 63-64 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.).

As modified, we affirm the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt.

/Craig Stoddart/

CRAIG STODDART

JUSTICE Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
160629F.U05

JUDGMENT

On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F10-52961-N.
Opinion delivered by Justice Stoddart. Justices Lang and Myers participating.

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment adjudicating guilt of the trial court is MODIFIED as follows:

The section entitled "Terms of Plea Bargain" is modified to show "N/A."

The section entitled "Plea to Motion to Adjudicate" is modified to show "Not True."

As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court's judgment adjudicating guilt. Judgment entered April 17, 2017.


Summaries of

Jones v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Apr 17, 2017
No. 05-16-00629-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 17, 2017)
Case details for

Jones v. State

Case Details

Full title:DEWAYNE LAMAR JONES, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: Apr 17, 2017

Citations

No. 05-16-00629-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 17, 2017)