Opinion issued June 18, 2009
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
NO. 01-08-00461-CR
IVAN ERNESTO LLANOS, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the184th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 973636
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Ivan Ernesto Llanos, pleaded guilty to the offense of robbery with an agreed punishment recommendation from the State. The trial court found appellant guilty, followed the State’s recommendation as to punishment, and placed appellant under the terms and conditions of community supervision for four years.
Subsequently, the State filed a motion to revoke appellant’s probation that alleged that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision by committing two offenses against the laws of the State of Texas: criminal trespass and carrying a weapon. The motion to revoke also alleged technical violations that included, among other things, a failure to report as ordered by the court and a failure to maintain employment. After a hearing on the motion to revoke, the trial court found that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his probation by failing to report for the months of January 2007 and February 2007, by failing to provide verifiable employment, and by violating the laws of the State of Texas by committing the acts of criminal trespass and carrying an illegal knife. The trial court revoked appellant’s community supervision and sentenced appellant to confinement for four years and assessed a $100 fine. Appellant gave notice of appeal.
Appellant’s counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error, that the appeals is without merit and is frivolous, and that the appeal must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal in these cases. Id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex. Crim. App.1978).
Counsel represents that she has served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. Having reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
An appellate court has the power to correct and reform a trial judgment to make the record speak the truth when it has the necessary data and information to do so. Nolan v. State, 39 SS.W.3d 697, 698 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) (Citing Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529 (Tex. App.— Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d); see also Tex. R. App. P. 43.2 (b). In this case, the trial court’s judgment incorrectly states that appellant entered a plea of true to the State’s second amended motion to revoke probation. The record supports modification of the judgment because the court reporter’s record reflects that appellant entered a plea of not true. Accordingly, the trial court’s judgment is reformed to reflect that appellant pleaded not true to the State’s second amended motion to revoke probation.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. Attorney Patricia Segura must immediately send the notice required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of that notice with the Clerk of this Court.
Any pending motions are denied as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Hanks, and Bland.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).