From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reel v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Feb 1, 2018
NO. 03-17-00130-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 1, 2018)

Opinion

NO. 03-17-00130-CR

02-01-2018

Freddie Lee Reel, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee


FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 391ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-16-0195-SB , HONORABLE BRAD GOODWIN, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Freddie Lee Reel was charged with possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, methamphetamine, in an amount of one gram or more but less than four grams, see Tex. Health & Safety Code § 481.112(c), a second-degree felony enhanced to a first-degree felony by means of the trial court's findings of "true" to prior felony convictions, see Tex. Penal Code § 12.42(b). After a bench trial, the trial court found Reel guilty and assessed his punishment at forty years in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Institutional Division.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 86-87 (1988).

Appellant's counsel has represented to the Court that he has provided copies of the motion and brief to appellant; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief; and provided appellant with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. Smith, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. To date, the Court has not received a pro se brief from appellant.

We have conducted an independent review of the record, including appellate counsel's brief, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeal is frivolous. However, our own review has revealed that the judgment incorrectly indicates that Reel was convicted under section 481.112(c) of the Penal Code, when he was in fact convicted under section 481.112(c) of the Health and Safety Code. Accordingly, we modify the judgment to reflect the correct statute. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993).

Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed as modified.

/s/_________

Scott K. Field, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Field, and Bourland Modified and, as Modified, Affirmed Filed: February 1, 2018 Do Not Publish


Summaries of

Reel v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Feb 1, 2018
NO. 03-17-00130-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 1, 2018)
Case details for

Reel v. State

Case Details

Full title:Freddie Lee Reel, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

Court:TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Date published: Feb 1, 2018

Citations

NO. 03-17-00130-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 1, 2018)