Opinion to issue August 3, 2006
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
____________
NOS. 01-06-00135-CR
01-06-00136-CR
____________
JAMEL LAMARR OLIDGE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 174th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 1041598 and 1041597
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Jamel Lamarr Olidge, pleaded guilty to two separate offenses of burglary of a habitation, and the trial court ordered a pre-sentence investigation report. Subsequently, the trial court held a hearing and found appellant guilty in each case and assessed punishment in each case at confinement for five years. We affirm.
Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that these appeals are without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the records that demonstrates the lack of arguable grounds of error. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d).
Counsel represents that he served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate records and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the records, and agree that the appeals are without merit. We therefore affirm the judgments of the trial court.
We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw in each case. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Taft and Nuchia.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).