Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, HoustonJan 23, 2003
No. 14-02-00675-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 23, 2003)

No. 14-02-00675-CR

Affirmed and Opinion filed January 23, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).

On Appeal from the 248th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 730,611

Panel consists of Justices YATES, ANDERSON, and FROST.



Appellant entered a plea of guilty before the jury to the offense of aggravated robbery. On December 13, 1996, the trial court, based on the jury's verdict on sentencing, placed appellant on probation for ten years. On April 3, 2002, the State filed a motion to revoke alleging appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his probation. On May 29, 2002, the State filed an amended motion. At the hearing, appellant pled true to the alleged violation. On June 14, 2002, the trial court granted the motion to revoke and sentenced appellant to ten years' confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — Institutional Division. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). As of this date, no pro se response has been filed. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.