Carley Yvonne Cooper v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )


Menu:
  •                     In the
    Court of Appeals
    Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
    No. 06-24-00049-CR
    CARLEY YVONNE COOPER, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 6th District Court
    Lamar County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 30321
    Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
    Memorandum Opinion by Justice Rambin
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Carley Yvonne Cooper pled guilty to engaging in organized criminal activity, a state-jail
    felony. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 71.02 (Supp.). In accordance with a plea agreement, the
    trial court placed Cooper on three years’ deferred adjudication community supervision. After
    Cooper failed to report to her community supervision officer and failed to complete community
    service restitution, the State moved to adjudicate her guilt. Cooper pled true to the State’s
    allegations and, as a result, the trial court revoked her community supervision, adjudicated her
    guilt, and sentenced her to twenty-four months’ confinement in state jail. Cooper appeals.
    Cooper’s attorney filed a brief stating that he reviewed the record and found no genuinely
    arguable issues that could be raised on appeal. The brief sets out the procedural history of the
    case and summarizes the evidence elicited during the course of the trial court proceedings. Since
    counsel provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no
    arguable grounds to be advanced, that evaluation meets the requirements of Anders v. California.
    Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 743–44 (1967); In re Schulman, 
    252 S.W.3d 403
    , 406 (Tex.
    Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding); Stafford v. State, 
    813 S.W.2d 503
    , 509–10 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 1991); High v. State, 
    573 S.W.2d 807
    , 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978).
    Counsel also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal.
    On May 31, 2024, counsel mailed to Cooper copies of the brief, the motion to withdraw,
    and the appellate record. Cooper was informed of her rights to review the record and file a
    pro se response. By letter dated May 31, we informed Cooper that her pro se response was due
    on or before July 3. On July 22, this Court further informed Cooper that the case would be set
    2
    for submission on the briefs on August 12. We received neither a pro se response from Cooper
    nor a motion requesting an extension of time in which to file such a response.
    We have reviewed the entire appellate record and have independently determined that no
    reversible error exists. See Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
    However, non-reversible error is found in the trial court’s judgment.
    The record shows that Cooper entered an open plea of true to the State’s motion to
    adjudicate guilt and that Cooper did not agree to any term of confinement. Even so, under the
    heading “Terms of Plea Bargain,” the trial court’s judgment mistakenly states that Cooper agreed
    to twenty-four months’ confinement. In Anders cases, appellate courts “have the authority to
    reform judgments and affirm as modified in cases where there is nonreversible error.” Sharpe v.
    State, 
    607 S.W.3d 446
    , 448 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2020, no pet.) (quoting Ferguson v. State,
    
    435 S.W.3d 291
    , 293 (Tex. App.—Waco 2014, pet. struck), overruled on other grounds by
    Cummins v. State, 
    646 S.W.3d 605
     (Tex. App.—Waco 2022, pet. ref’d)).
    3
    Accordingly, we modify the trial court’s judgment by deleting the phrase “TWENTY-
    FOUR (24) MONTHS IN THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE-
    STATE JAIL DIVISION” from the “Terms of Plea Bargain” section. As modified, we affirm
    the trial court’s judgment.1
    Jeff Rambin
    Justice
    Date Submitted:            August 12, 2024
    Date Decided:              September 17, 2024
    Do Not Publish
    1
    Since we agree that this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel’s
    request to withdraw from further representation of appellant in this case. See Anders, 
    386 U.S. at 744
    . No substitute
    counsel will be appointed. Should appellant desire to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of
    Criminal Appeals, appellant must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se
    petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review (1) must be filed within thirty days from
    either the date of this opinion or the date on which the last timely motion for rehearing was overruled by this Court,
    see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2, (2) must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, see TEX. R. APP. P.
    68.3, and (3) should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, see TEX.
    R. APP. P. 68.4.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-24-00049-CR

Filed Date: 9/17/2024

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/18/2024