In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
________________
NO. 09-08-00221-CR
_____________________
TERRY MICHAEL FRAZIER, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 96363
Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Terry Michael Frazier pled guilty to injury to a child. On February 6, 2006, the trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Frazier guilty, but deferred further proceedings, placed Frazier on community supervision for five years, and assessed a fine of $500. On November 8, 2007, the State filed a motion to revoke Frazier's unadjudicated community supervision. Frazier pled "true" to two violations of the conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found that Frazier violated the conditions of his community supervision, found Frazier guilty of injury to a child, and assessed punishment at ten years of confinement.
Frazier's appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel's professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. 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). On October 2, 2008, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from appellant. We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We note that the judgment recites that Frazier was charged by indictment, but the record reflects that Frazier waived the right to be charged by indictment and was instead charged by information. This Court has the authority to reform the trial court's judgment to correct a clerical error. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). We therefore reform the judgment to read that Frazier was charged by information. We affirm the trial court's judgment as reformed. (1)
AFFIRMED AS REFORMED.
_________________________________
DAVID GAULTNEY
Justice
Submitted on February 11, 2009
Opinion Delivered February 25, 2009
Do not publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.
1. Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary
review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.