TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-24-00465-CR

Bobby Joe Jones, Jr., Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY NO. CR-13-0430, THE HONORABLE TRACIE WRIGHT-RENEAU, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found appellant Bobby Joe Jones, Jr. guilty of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, assessed his punishment at five years’ confinement, and recommended that he be placed on community supervision. See Tex. Penal Code § 22.02(a)(2). The trial court sentenced Jones in accordance with the jury’s recommendation, suspended his sentence, and placed him on community supervision for a period of ten years. The State subsequently moved to revoke Jones’s community supervision, alleging that he had violated its conditions. The trial court granted the State’s motion, revoked Jones’s community supervision, and sentenced him to five years’ confinement.

Jones’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81–82 (1988). Jones’s counsel has also certified to the Court that he sent copies of the motion and brief to Jones; informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response; and provided him with a motion to assist him in obtaining the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. To date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have conducted an independent review of the record, including the record of the revocation proceeding below and appellate counsel’s brief, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Nevertheless, while reviewing the record, we found three typographical errors in the judgment revoking community supervision: (1) Jones’s original sentence was stated to have been probated for five years, when he was in fact placed on community supervision for a period of ten years; (2) the box for “General Fine” was mistakenly checked; and (3) under special findings and orders was erroneously provided, “APPEAL WAIVED.

NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED.”

The appropriate remedy is to modify the trial court’s judgment to correct these errors. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). Accordingly, we modify the judgment revoking community supervision in trial court cause number CR-13-0430 by giving Jones’s “Original Punishment Assessed” as “5 YEARS INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, TDCJ PROBATED 10 YEARS”; unchecking the box for “General Fine”; and deleting the language, “APPEAL WAIVED. NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED.”

We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

Having modified the trial court’s judgment in cause number CR-13-0430 as set out above, we affirm the judgment revoking community supervision as modified.

__________________________________________ Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice Before Justices Triana, Theofanis, and Crump Modified and, as Modified, Affirmed Filed: August 14, 2025 Do Not Publish