Andrew Mercer v. State
05-16-00336-CR
| Tex. App. | Dec 1, 2016Background
- Andrew Mercer pleaded true on an open plea to six allegations after being on deferred community supervision; later the State moved to adjudicate guilt for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.
- At the adjudication hearing the trial court found Mercer guilty and sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment; the court did not orally pronounce a fine.
- The written judgment, however, inaccurately stated there was a plea bargain agreement and included a $2,500 fine that had been previously assessed but probated at the time of deferred supervision.
- Mercer's appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding the appeal was frivolous and provided the brief to Mercer; Mercer did not file a pro se response despite being notified of the right to do so.
- The Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record (as required in Anders/Bledsoe situations) and found no arguable grounds for appeal but corrected the written judgment to reflect an open plea and to remove the $2,500 fine.
- As modified, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s adjudication of guilt and ten-year sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mercer) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal presents any non-frivolous issues | Counsel concluded no arguable issues; Mercer did not file a response to assert issues | State urged affirmance | Court agreed appeal is frivolous and without merit after independent review |
| Whether judgment correctly reflects plea bargain terms | Mercer argues (implicitly) record shows open plea | State defends trial court’s written judgment as entered | Court modified judgment: "Terms of Plea Bargain" changed to "Open" |
| Whether the $2,500 fine should remain in the judgment | Mercer argues fine was probated previously and not re-imposed | State relied on written judgment including the fine | Court removed the $2,500 fine because no fine was orally pronounced and oral sentence controls over written judgment |
| Whether counsel complied with Anders requirements | Mercer received Anders brief; no pro se response filed | State relies on Anders compliance to support disposition | Court found counsel’s brief met Anders requirements and conducted required independent review (Bledsoe) |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (establishes procedures when counsel concludes appeal is frivolous)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (discusses counsel’s duties in Anders-type submissions)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (explains appellate court’s independent-review duty in Anders cases)
- Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26 (authorizes correcting judgments to reflect the record)
- Coffey v. State, 979 S.W.2d 326 (oral pronouncement of sentence controls over written judgment)