MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Fillmore, Myers, and Evans Opinion by Justice Evans

Brandon Deon Williams was convicted, following the adjudication of his guilt, of theft enhanced by two prior theft convictions. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 31.03(e)(4)(D) (West Supp. 2014). He was also convicted of a new credit card abuse offense. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 32.31(b)(1)(A) (West 2011). In each case, the trial court assessed punishment at one year’s confinement in a state jail. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeals are 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, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). 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) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases).

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 appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals.

Although not an arguable issue, we note the trial court’s judgment in cause no. 05-14- 01482-CR incorrectly identifies the statute for the offense as “32.21 Penal Code.” Appellant was convicted of credit card abuse under section 32.31 of the Texas Penal Code. Accordingly, we modify the judgment to show the statute for the offense is “32.31 Penal Code.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529–30 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref’d).

In cause no. 05-14-01481-CR, we affirm the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt. In cause no. 05-14-01482-CR, we affirm the trial court’s judgment as modified.

/David Evans/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 141481F.U05 Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

BRANDON DEON WILLIAMS, Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Appellant Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F12-20826-T).

No. 05-14-01481-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Evans, Justices Fillmore and Myers participating. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 27th day of May, 2015.

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

BRANDON DEON WILLIAMS, Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Appellant Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F14-57522-T).

No. 05-14-01482-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Evans, Justices Fillmore and Myers participating. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is MODIFIED as follows:

The section entitled “Statute for Offense” is modified to show “32.31 Penal Code.”

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

Judgment entered this May 27th, 2015.