Background
Chris Jamal Landor pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to third-degree-felony evading arrest or detention with a motor vehicle. The trial court sentenced him to ten years’ confinement and a $1,000 fine, suspended the sentence, and placed him on community supervision for ten years.
After the State moved to revoke community supervision and later amended its motion, Landor pleaded “true” to a curfew allegation that the State abandoned and “not true” to the remaining allegations, including allegations 2, 3, and 4. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court found allegations 2, 3, and 4 true, revoked community supervision, and imposed ten years’ confinement and the $1,000 fine. Landor’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding that the appeal was frivolous, and Landor did not file a pro se response.
The Court’s Holding
After independently examining the entire record and counsel’s Anders brief, the Ninth Court of Appeals found no reversible error and concluded that the appeal was wholly frivolous. It therefore declined to order the appointment of new counsel to rebrief the appeal.
The appellate court nevertheless identified a nonreversible clerical error in the judgment revoking community supervision. Although the judgment stated that Landor pleaded “true” to allegations 2, 3, and 4, the record showed that he pleaded “not true” and that the trial court found those allegations true. Exercising its authority to make the judgment accurately reflect the record, the court modified those plea and finding entries and affirmed the judgment as modified.
Key Takeaways
- An appellate court reviewing an Anders brief must independently examine the entire record to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous.
- A clerical error in a criminal judgment may be corrected on appeal even when the error does not warrant reversal.
- The corrected judgment reflects that Landor pleaded “not true” to allegations 2, 3, and 4 and that the trial court found those allegations “true.”
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates that Anders review does not prevent an appellate court from correcting nonreversible inaccuracies in a criminal judgment. Accurate plea and finding entries matter because the written judgment should faithfully document what occurred during the revocation proceeding.