AFFIRMED as MODIFIED and Opinion Filed March 27, 2019

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00100-CR No. 05-18-00101-CR No. 05-18-00102-CR MARQUEISE JEROME DAVIS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F14-40153-M, F14-40269-M, F14-75213-M MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Whitehill, Molberg, and Reichek Opinion by Justice Whitehill Appellant Marqueise Jerome Davis appeals his convictions, following the adjudication of his guilt in each case, for two burglary of a habitation offenses and one aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon offense. The trial court assessed punishment at fifteen years’ imprisonment for each burglary conviction and twenty years’ imprisonment for the aggravated robbery conviction.

On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he 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 judgments adjudicating guilt incorrectly recite there were plea bargain terms in these cases. The record, however, shows appellant entered open pleas of true to the allegations in the motions to adjudicate. Accordingly, on our own motion, we modify the section of each judgment entitled “terms of plea bargain” to show “open.” TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) (courts of appeals have authority to modify a judgment); Estrada v. State, 334 S.W.3d 57, 63–64 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2009, no pet.) (same).

As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgments adjudicating guilt.

/Bill Whitehill/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 180100F.U05

–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MARQUEISE JEROME DAVIS, On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Appellant Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14-40153-M.

No. 05-18-00100-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill.

Justices Molberg and Reichek participating.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment adjudicating guilt of the trial court is MODIFIED as follows: The section entitled “Terms of Plea Bargain” is modified to show “Open.”

As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt.

Judgment entered March 27, 2019.

–3– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MARQUEISE JEROME DAVIS, On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Appellant Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14-40269-M.

No. 05-18-00101-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill.

Justices Molberg and Reichek participating.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment adjudicating guilt of the trial court is MODIFIED as follows: The section entitled “Terms of Plea Bargain” is modified to show “Open.”

As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt.

Judgment entered March 27, 2019.

–4– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MARQUEISE JEROME DAVIS, On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Appellant Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14-75213-M.

No. 05-18-00102-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill.

Justices Molberg and Reichek participating.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment adjudicating guilt of the trial court is MODIFIED as follows: The section entitled “Terms of Plea Bargain” is modified to show “Open.”

As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt.

Judgment entered March 27, 2019.

–5–