Affirmed as Modified and Opinion Filed November 2 , 2023

In the 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas Nos. 05
- 22
- 01040
- CR 05
- 22
- 01041
- CR 05
- 22
- 01042
- CR 05
- 22
- 01043
- CR 05
- 22
- 01044
- CR ZKAVEON DEVANTE PLEA SANT , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F17
- 52206, F17
- 52207, F17
- 70396,

F17
- 75256, and F17
- 75275 MEMORANDUM OPINION Be fore Justices Carlyle, Smith, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Carlyle Zkaveon Devante Pleasant appeals the revocation of his community supervision and adjudication of guilt for the offenses of robbery, evading arrest, and aggravated robbery. As modified bel ow, we affirm in this memorandum opinion. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.4. Appellant’s counsel has filed a motion to withdraw that is supported by a brief in which he professionally examines the record and applicable law then concludes– 2

–

this appeal is frivolous an d without merit. Specifically, counsel analyzes potential issues concerning (1) venue, (2) the applicable statutes of limitations, (3) appointment of counsel, (4) the indictment, (5) motions to revoke and adjudicate, (6) waiver of the right to a jury, (7) the sufficiency of the evidence, (8) objections and rulings, (9) admonitions, (10) the validity of the sentence, (11) effective assistance of counsel, and (12) the performed duties of appointed counsel. After an order from this Court, counsel supplemented the brief with additional details concerning sentencing. We conclude counsel’s amended brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), presents a professional evaluation of the record, and shows why there are no arguable grounds to advance on appeal. See High v.
State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 812

– 13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets requirements of Anders ). Counsel certifies that he has provided Mr. Pleasant with a copy of the brief and his motion to withdraw. On May 23, 2023, this Court advised Mr. Pleasant of his right to file a pro se response, but he has not
done so. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

– 21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (explaining right to file pro se response to Anders brief filed by counsel). We have reviewed the record, the Anders brief filed by Mr. Pleasant’s counsel, and the letter response filed by the State. See Bledsoe v. State , 17 8 S.W.3d 824, 826

– 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (identifying appellate courts’ duties in Anders cases). We– 3

–

agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit, and we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
T he State has asked us to mod ify the judgment below to reflect the amount of unpaid costs. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State , 865 S.W.2d 26, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (en banc); Asberry v. State , 813 S.W.2d 526, 529

– 30 (Tex. App.

— Dallas, pet. ref’d); T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC
. a rt. 42.16 . Here, the record reflects that (1) appellant was adjudicated guilty in five cases, (2) the trial court assessed $522.90 in costs in four of those cases (including F17

- 75275), (3) the trial court assessed $549.90 in one of those cases, and (4) ap pellant paid $298.90 in costs. We therefore modify the judgment in F17

- 75275 (the highest category offense at issue) to reflect the fact that appellant has a total unpaid balance of $271.90 in

costs for all of the cases below and affirm the judgment as modified.

22 1040f .u05 221041f.u05 221042f.u05 221043f.u05 221044f.u05 Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2(b) /Cory L. Carlyle/ / CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE– 4

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ZKAVEON DEVANTE PLEASANT, Appellant
No. 05

- 22

- 01040

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17

- 52206. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Smith and Kennedy participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered this 2 nd day of November , 2023

.– 5

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ZKAVEON DEVANTE PLEASANT, Appellant
No. 05

- 22

- 01041

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17

- 5220 7

. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Smith and Kennedy participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered this 2 nd day of November , 2023

.– 6

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ZKAVEON DEVANTE PLEASANT, Appellant
No. 05

- 22

- 01042

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17

- 70396. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Smith and Kennedy participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

. Judgment enter ed this 2 nd day of N ovember , 2 023

.– 7

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ZKAVEON DEVANTE PLEASANT, Appellant
No. 05

- 22

- 01043

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17

- 75275. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Smith and Kennedy participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED to add the following : Defendant has an unpaid balance of $271.90 in costs.
As REFORMED , the judgment is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered this 2 nd day of November , 2023

.– 8

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

ZKAVEON DEVANTE PLEASANT, Appellant
No. 05

- 22

- 01044

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17

- 75256. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Smith and Kennedy participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered this 2 nd day of November , 2023

.