Purvis Vincent Traylor a/k/a Purvis V. Traylor v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 252nd District Court of Jefferson County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-09-00384-CR _________________ PURVIS VINCENT TRAYLOR A/K/A PURVIS V. TRAYLOR, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _____________________________________________________________ _____ __ On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 97572 _______________________________________________________________ _____ _ MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Purvis Vincent Traylor a/k/a Purvis V. Traylor pled guilty to burglary of a habitation. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Traylor guilty, but deferred further proceedings and placed Traylor on community supervision for ten years. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Traylor s unadjudicated community supervision. Traylor pled true to three violations of the conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found that Traylor violated the conditions of his community supervision, found Traylor guilty of 1 burglary of a habitation as a repeat felony offender, and assessed punishment at twentyfive years of confinement. Traylor s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel s professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On February 11, 2010, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from appellant. We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel s conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to rebrief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We note that the trial court s judgment incorrectly recites that Traylor s offense is a first-degree felony. This Court has the authority to reform the trial court s judgment to correct a clerical error. Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). Therefore, we delete 1st degree felony from the section of the judgment entitled Degree and substitute 2nd degree felony, repeat felony offender in its place. We affirm the trial court s judgment as reformed.1 AFFIRMED AS REFORMED. ___________________________ DAVID GAULTNEY Justice 1 Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68. 2 Submitted on June 8, 2010 Opinion Delivered June 23, 2010 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
