### In The C ou rt o f A p p ea ls Si x t h Appe l l at e Di st r i c t o f Te x as a t Te x ar ka na

______________________________ No . 0 6- 08 -0 01 07 -C R

______________________________ KAPOOLA EARL

J I L ES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appea l from the 7th J udicial District Court

Smit h County , Texas Trial Court No. 007-2460- 06

B e f o r e M o r r i s s , C
. J. , C a

rt e r an d M o s e l e y , JJ. Me mor and

um O pin ion

by Chi e f Jus tic e Mo rr issTh is a pp e a l ha s be e n tr ans fe rr e d to t his Cou rt fr om t he Tyle r C ourt

of Ap pe a ls p ur su ant t o 1 the Te xas S up re me Court ' s d oc ke t e qu a lizatio n p ro g ra m. 2 MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON Kapoola Earl J iles appea ls from his conviction on his open plea of guilty to a third-deg ree felony offe nse of dr iving while intoxicated (DWI ). See T EX . P EN A L C ODE ANN . § 49.04 (Ve rnon 1 2003), § 49.09(b) (Ve rnon Supp. 2008)
. J iles pled "tr ue" to the enhanc ement, and t h e t ri al court sentenc ed him to twelve y ear s' imprisonment. J iles was re prese nted by differ ent, appointed, c ounsel at trial and on a

ppeal. Jile s' a tto rn e y

has fi le d a

br ie f whic h d isc us se s th e re c or d a nd re vie ws the pr oc e e din g s. Counsel has thus provided a profe ssional e valuation of the rec ord demonstrating why , in effe ct, there
are no arguable gr ounds to be advance d. This meets the re quirements of An de rs v . Ca lif or nia , 386 U. S. 7 38 (1 96 7) ; Sta

ffo rd v . S tate , 813 S.W .2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); and Hi gh v . S tate , 573 S.W .2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [ Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel mailed a copy

of the brie f to J iles September 24, 2008, informing him of his right to examine the entire a

ppellate r ecor d and to file a pro se r esponse. Counsel si multaneously filed
a mot ion wi th thi s Court se e kin g to wi thd ra w a s c ouns e l in thi s a

pp e a l. Jile s ha s no t fi le d a pr o s e response , nor has he reque sted an e x tension of time in which to file such a response . We have de termined that this appea l is wholly frivolous. We have inde pendently revie wed the c le rk ' s r e c or d a

nd the re po rt e r' s re c or d, and we a g re e that no argua

ble iss ue s su

pp or t an a pp e a l. Se e Bl e ds oev . S

tate , 178 S.W .3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).3

We do note, howeve r, that the trial court' s judgme nt in this case indicates the de g ree of the offe nse is a " 2nd Deg ree Fe lony ." T his offense is a third-deg ree felony
. See T EX . P EN A L C ODE ANN . § § 4 9
. 0 4 , 4 9
. 0 9 ( b )
. T h e p u n i s h m e n tr an g e w a s c o r r e c t l y e n h an c e d

t o t h a t o f a s e c o n d
- d e g r e e f

e l o n y. See T EX . P EN A L C ODE ANN . § 12 .4 2( a )( 3) (V e rn on Sup p. 20 08 ). Th is C ourt ha s th e a uth or ity to ref orm the judg ment to make the r ecor d speak the t ru t h wh en t h e matter has bee n called to our att en t i o n b y

any source . Fr e nc h v . S

tate , 830 S.W .2d 607 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). I n Asberry v
. Sta te , 813 S.W .2d 526 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref' d), t he court noted t hat t he authority of the
a pp e llate c ourt

to r e fo rm inc or re c t judg me nts is n ot d e pe nd e nt o n r e qu e st o f a ny pa rt y ; th e a pp e llate
c ourt may a c t su a sp on te . T he Te xas Rul e s of Ap pe llate Pr oc e dure pr ov ide dir e c t a uth or ity fo r t

his Court to modify

the judg ment of the trial c ourt. T EX . R. A PP . P. 43.2. Th e re fo re , w e he re by

re fo rm the jud g me nt t o in dic a te that th e c or re c t deg re e of

the of fe ns e is a third-deg ree felony
.Since we a g ree this case pr esents no reversible e rror , we a lso, in accor dance with An de rs , 2 g ra nt c ouns e l' s r e qu e st t o w ith dr aw f ro m f ur the r r e pr e se ntatio n o f Jile s in thi s c a se . N o s ub sti tut e counsel will be a

ppointed. Should Ji les wish to seek fur ther re view of this ca se by the Texas Court of Criminal Appea ls, he must either re tain an attorne y to file a pe tition for discretionar y revie w or file a pr o se petition for discr etionary revie w. Any

petition for discre tionary revie w must be filed within thirty

day s from the date of e ither this opinion or the l ast timely motion for rehea ring that was ov e rr ule d b y thi s Co ur t. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 68.2. Any petition for discre tionary re v i ew m u s t be filed with this Court, after which it will be forwa rded to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals along with the rest of the filings in this case
. S ee T EX . R. A PP . P. 68.3. Any petition for discre tionary revie w should comply

with the require ments of Rule 68.4 of the Te x as Rules of Appe llate Proce dure. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 68.4. 4 As re fo rm e d, we a ff

ir m th e jud g me nt o f t

he tr ia l c ourt . 2

J o s h R
. M o r

r i s s , III Chief J ustice Date Submitted: Dec ember 1, 2008 Date D ecide d: Dec ember 2, 2008 Do No t Pu

bli sh