Daniel Paul Campbell v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: April 29, 2004
• Docket: 01-02-01317-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued April 29, 2004

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-02-01317-CR

DANIEL PAUL CAMPBELL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 272nd District Court

Brazos County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 28,886-272

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant, Daniel Paul Campbell, pleaded guilty to bail jumping and was sentenced to confinement for 10 years. The trial court suspended the sentence, placed appellant on community supervision for five years, and imposed a fine of $1000. The State filed a motion to revoke community supervision to which appellant entered a plea of not true. After a hearing, the trial court found the allegations in the State’s motion to be true, and sentenced appellant to confinement for 10 years. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. We affirm.

               Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that this appeal is without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record that demonstrates the lack of arguable grounds of error. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d).

               Counsel represents that he served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeal is without merit.

               We do find nonreversible error in the judgment, however. It reads that appellant entered a plea of “true.” We may correct and modify the judgment of a trial court to make the record speak the truth when we have the necessary data and information to do so, or to make any appropriate order as the law and nature of the case may require. See Campbell v. State, 900 S.W.2d 763, 773 (Tex. App.—Waco 1995, no pet.); Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b), 43.6. Accordingly, we modify the trial court’s judgment to read that appellant entered a plea of “not true.”

               We affirm the judgment of the trial court, as modified.

               We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Taft, Hanks, and Higley.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).