From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gaines v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
May 29, 2020
No. 05-19-00660-CR (Tex. App. May. 29, 2020)

Opinion

No. 05-19-00660-CR

05-29-2020

BRODERICK GAINES, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F-1731787-W

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Whitehill, Osborne, and Carlyle
Opinion by Justice Whitehill

Appellant pled no contest to sexual assault of a child. After a bench trial, the trial court found him guilty and sentenced him to twelve years in prison.

Appellant's counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief that professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel provided appellant with a copy of the brief, the appellate record, and the motion to withdraw.

The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). It 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, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets Anders requirements).

We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant's right to respond to Anders brief). He has not filed a response.

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

We do, however, find two errors in the judgment requiring correction.

First, the judgment states that the "Statute for Offense" was "22.01(A)(2) Penal Code," but the correct reference is § 22.011(a)(2) of the Penal Code.

Second, the judgment states that appellant pled guilty, but he actually pled no contest.

Accordingly, we sua sponte modify the judgment to correct these errors. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529-30 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd).

We grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgment as modified.

/Bill Whitehill/

BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)
190660F.U05

JUDGMENT

On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F-1731787-W.
Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. Justices Osborne and Carlyle participating.

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

The "Statute of Offense" is modified to show "22.011(a)(2) Penal Code."

The "Plea to Offense" is modified to show "No contest."

We AFFIRM the trial court's judgment as modified. Judgment entered May 29, 2020


Summaries of

Gaines v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
May 29, 2020
No. 05-19-00660-CR (Tex. App. May. 29, 2020)
Case details for

Gaines v. State

Case Details

Full title:BRODERICK GAINES, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: May 29, 2020

Citations

No. 05-19-00660-CR (Tex. App. May. 29, 2020)