Terry William Strachan v. State ( 2015 )

Affirmed in part; Affirmed as Modified in part and Opinion Filed December 7, 2015
Court of Appeals
S In The
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-00707-CR
No. 05-14-00708-CR
No. 05-14-00709-CR
TERRY WILLIAM STRACHAN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court
Collin County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 296-80709-2013, 296-80710-2013, and 296-80940-2013
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Fillmore and Stoddart
Opinion by Chief Justice Wright
Terry William Strachan waived a jury and pleaded guilty to unauthorized use of a
vehicle, evading arrest or detention with a vehicle, and possession of a controlled substance in
Penalty Group 1 between one gram and four grams.1 After finding appellant guilty, the trial court
assessed punishment at two, eight, and eight years confinement, respectively, with 454 days of
back credit and no fine. The sentences were to run concurrently. On appeal, appellant’s attorney
filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief
1
This Court’s cause number 05-14-00708-CR and the trial court’s cause number 296-80710-2013 contain the unauthorized use of a vehicle
judgment. This Court’s cause number 05-14-00707-CR and the trial court’s cause number 296-80709-2013 contain the evading arrest or
detention with a vehicle judgment. This Court’s cause number 05-14-00709-CR and the trial court’s cause number 296-80940-2013 contain the
possession of a controlled substance in Penalty Group 1 between one gram and four grams judgment.
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. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro
se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21
(Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases).
We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree the appeal is frivolous and
without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
Although not an arguable ground to advance, we note there is an error in the trial court’s
judgments in cause numbers 05-14-00707-CR and 05-14-00709-CR. The record shows the
appellant pleaded true to the enhancement paragraphs and the trial court found the enhancement
paragraphs true. The written judgments in these cases, however, recite no information for
appellant’s plea to the enhancement paragraphs or the trial court’s findings on the enhancement
paragraphs. Thus the written judgments are incorrect in these cases. This Court has the authority
to correct a trial court’s judgment when it has the necessary data and information to do so. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529–30 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d). We modify the written
judgments in cause numbers 05-14-00707-CR and 05-14-00709-CR to show appellant pleaded
true to the enhancement paragraphs and the trial court found the enhancement paragraphs true.
–2–
As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgments in cause numbers 05-14-00707-CR
and 05-14-00709-CR. We affirm the trial court’s judgment in cause number 05-14-00708-CR.
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47 /Carolyn Wright/
140707F.U05 CAROLYN WRIGHT
CHIEF JUSTICE
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
TERRY WILLIAM STRACHAN, Appellant On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District
Court, Collin County, Texas
No. 05-14-00707-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. 296-80709-2013.
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Fillmore and Stoddart participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED
as follows:
Plea to 1st Enhancement Paragraph: TRUE
Findings on 1st Enhancement Paragraph: TRUE
As MODIFIED, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered December 7, 2015.
–4–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
TERRY WILLIAM STRACHAN, Appellant On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District
Court, Collin County, Texas
No. 05-14-00708-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. 296-80710-2013.
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Fillmore and Stoddart participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered December 7, 2015.
–5–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
TERRY WILLIAM STRACHAN, Appellant On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District
Court, Collin County, Texas
No. 05-14-00709-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. 296-80940-2013.
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Fillmore and Stoddart participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED
as follows:
Plea to 1st Enhancement Paragraph: TRUE
Findings on 1st Enhancement Paragraph: TRUE
As MODIFIED, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered December 7, 2015.
–6–