Michael Anthony Anzaldua v. State ( 2005 )

Opinion to issue August 31, 2005 

In The

Court of Appeals

For The  

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-04-01016-CR

____________

MICHAEL ANTHONY ANZALDUA, Appellant  

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 966910

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION  

               Appellant, Michael Anthony Anzaldua, pleaded guilty to a jury to the offense of murder. The jury found appellant guilty and assessed his punishment at confinement for 40 years. We affirm the judgment as so modified.

               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.

                During this Court’s review of the record, an obvious clerical error in the trial court’s judgment and sentence was found. The Judgment and Sentence signed by the trial court, states “Plea: Not Guilty”. The trial court’s docket sheet and the court reporter’s transcript reflect that the appellant entered a plea of “guilty” at the time he was arraigned in the presence of the jury.               “An appellate court has the power to correct and reform a trial court judgment ‘to make the record speak the truth when it has the necessary data and information to do so . . . .’” Nolan v. State, 39 S.W.3d 697, 698 (Tex. App—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) (citing Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529-31 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet’ref); see Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b).

               Therefore, we find that the judgment and sentence of the trial court, incorrectly stated that appellant’s plea to the indictment was "not guilty". Accordingly, we modify the judgment of the trial in cause number 966910 to reflect that appellant, Michael Anthony Anzaldua, pleaded “guilty”, and we affirm the judgment as so 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 Nuchia, Keyes, and Bland.

Do not publish.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