Affirmed as modified; Opinion Filed June 28, 2018.
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-17-00757-CR
MIGUEL GUERRERO REYES, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 292nd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F16-53482-V
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Stoddart
Opinion by Justice Lang
A jury convicted Miguel Guerrero Reyes of indecency with a child. The trial court
sentenced appellant to twelve years in prison. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which
she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements
of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the
record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets
requirements of Anders). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant
of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State, 436
S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se response to
Anders brief filed by counsel).
We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,
826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the
appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support
the appeal.
Although not an arguable issue, we note the trial court’s judgment incorrectly recites the
offense for which appellant was convicted as “indecency with a child continuous,” which is a first-
degree felony. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 21.02(b) (West Supp. 2017). The record shows,
however, appellant was indicted for and the jury found him guilty of indecency with a child by
sexual contact, which is a second-degree felony. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 21.11(a)(1). On
our own motion, we modify the judgment to show the offense for which appellant was convicted
is “indecency with a child by sexual contact.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865
S.W.2d 26, 27–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Estrada v. State, 334 S.W.3d 57, 63–64 (Tex. App.—
Dallas 2009, no pet.).
As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
/Douglas S. Lang/
DOUGLAS S. LANG
JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
170757F.U05
–2–
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
MIGUEL GUERRERO REYES, Appellant On Appeal from the 292nd Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-17-00757-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F16-53482-V.
Opinion delivered by Justice Lang. Justices
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Myers and Stoddart participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is MODIFIED
as follows:
The section entitled “Offense for which Defendant Convicted” is modified to show
“Indecency with a Child by Sexual Contact.”
As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment.
Judgment entered this 28th day of June, 2018.
–3–