                                        In The

                                 Court of Appeals
                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                             ___________________
                                 NO. 09-11-00486-CR
                             ___________________

                       BYRON LEON BERKLEY, Appellant

                                          V.

                     THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
____________________________________________________________________                  _

                   On Appeal from the 435th District Court
                        Montgomery County, Texas
                      Trial Cause No. 11-03-03054 CR
____________________________________________________________________                  _

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

      A jury convicted Byron Leon Berkley of engaging in organized criminal activity,

enhanced, and the trial court sentenced Berkley to forty-five years in prison. Berkley’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 September 6, 2012, we granted an extension of time for Berkley to file a pro

se brief. We received no response from Berkley. We have determined that this appeal is

wholly frivolous. We have independently examined the clerk’s record and the reporter’s

                                           1
record, and we agree that no arguable issues support an appeal. We find it unnecessary to

order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813

S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

       However, according to the judgment, the trial court assessed $4,330.97 in

attorney’s fees. The record does not indicate that Berkley has the financial resources to

enable him to pay attorney’s fees.     See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 26.04(p),

26.05(g) (West Supp. 2012); see also Roberts v. State, 327 S.W.3d 880, 883-84 (Tex.

App.—Beaumont 2010, no pet.). Accordingly, we modify the judgment to delete the

$4,330.97 in attorney’s fees. We affirm the trial court’s judgment as modified. 1

       AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.




                                                 ________________________________
                                                        STEVE McKEITHEN
                                                            Chief Justice

Submitted on December 28, 2012
Opinion Delivered February 6, 2013
Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.




       1
        Berkley may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
                                            2
