AT AUSTIN
NO. 3-91-456-CR
RICHARD ARTHUR WILLIAMS,
APPELLANT
vs.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
APPELLEE
FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF BELL COUNTY, NO. 2C91-97,310, HONORABLE JOHN BARINA, JUDGE
PER CURIAM
After hearing appellant's plea of guilty and judicial confession, the county court at law found him guilty of criminal mischief. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 28.03(a), (b)(3) (Supp. 1992). The court assessed punishment at incarceration for 120 days.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
[Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Aboussie and B. A. Smith]
Affirmed
Filed: March 11, 1992
[Do Not Publish]