Court Opinion

ID: 3076493
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 01:20:14.286789+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:14:03.536014
License: Public Domain

In The

                                Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                           ____________________
                              NO. 09-12-00375-CR
                           ____________________

                         D’KEMAAN WEST, Appellant

                                       V.

                       THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
_______________________________________________________         ______________

                   On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
                          Jefferson County, Texas
                         Trial Cause No. 11-11038
________________________________________________________         _____________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      D’Kemaan West pleaded guilty, under a plea agreement, to aggravated

robbery. The trial court placed him on deferred adjudication community

supervision. He violated the terms and conditions of community supervision set by

the court. The State filed a motion to revoke. The trial court revoked the

community supervision, found him guilty of aggravated robbery, and sentenced

him to twenty-five years in prison.

                                        1
      West’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional

evaluation of the record and concludes there are no arguable points of error. See

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967); High v.

State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). This Court granted an extension of

time for appellant to file a pro se response. West filed a response.

      After reviewing the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, it is apparent

that the trial court imposed a fine in the written judgment that it did not impose in

the oral rendition of judgment. See Taylor v. State, 131 S.W.3d 497, 500, 502 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2004) (When the oral pronouncement of sentence and the written

judgment conflict, the oral pronouncement controls.). In response to this Court’s

inquiry, both the State and West agree that the $1000.00 fine should be deleted

from the written judgment. After reviewing the clerk’s record, the reporter’s

record, the Anders brief, and the pro se response, we find no other arguable

grounds for appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1991).

      We modify the written judgment to delete the $1,000 fine. As modified, the

judgment is affirmed.

                                          2
      AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

                                           ________________________________
                                                   DAVID GAULTNEY
                                                         Justice

Submitted on May 29, 2013
Opinion Delivered June 26, 2013
Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton, JJ.

                                       3