Opinion by Chief Justice Wright
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F16-40682-I
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Myers, and Justice Brown
Opinion by Chief Justice Wright
A jury convicted appellant of aggravated assault involving family violence and causing serious bodily injury with a deadly weapon. During the punishment phase, appellant pleaded true to one enhancement paragraph contained in the indictment. The jury found the enhancement paragraph true and assessed punishment at fifteen years' imprisonment and a $500 fine. 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. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se response to Anders brief filed by counsel).
Appellant filed a pro se response raising several issues. 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 contains several errors, including: (1) the title of the judgment states "Judgment of Conviction by Court—Waiver of Jury Trial," (2) "plea to offense" states "guilty," (3) terms of plea bargain states "15 years TDCJ; $500 fine," and (4) the fine is not included in the judgment. As the records indicate, appellant pleaded not guilty before a jury. And after finding appellant guilty, the jury assessed a fifteen-year sentence and a $500 fine. Accordingly, on our own motion, we modify the judgment title to show "Judgment of Conviction By Jury," the section of the judgment entitled "plea to offense" to state "not guilty," the section entitled "terms of plea bargain" to state "none," and the section entitled "fine" to include the $500 fine. TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (courts of appeals have authority to modify judgment); Estrada v. State, 334 S.W.3d 57, 63-64 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.) (same).
As modified, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
/Carolyn Wright/
CAROLYN WRIGHT
CHIEF JUSTICE Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
161185F.U05
JUDGMENT
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F16-40682-I.
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Myers and Brown participating.
Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED as follows:
The title is modified to show "Judgment of Conviction by Jury."
The section entitled "Plea to Offense" is modified to show "Not Guilty."
The section entitled "Terms of Plea Bargain" is modified to show "None."
The section entitled "Fine" is modified to show "500."
As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court's judgment. Judgment entered October 2, 2017.