TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-97-00755-CR
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
NOS. 47,657 & 47,702, HONORABLE OLIVER KELLEY, JUDGE PRESIDING
Appellant pleaded guilty to tampering with physical evidence and felony driving while intoxicated. Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 37.09(a)(1) (West 1994), 49.04(a), 49.09(b) (West Supp. 1998). The district court assessed punishment for the first offense at imprisonment for ten years and a $1000 fine, but suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on community supervision. The court assessed punishment for the second offense at imprisonment for five years and a $1000 fine.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeals are 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); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). In addition, appellant examined the appellate record and filed a pro se brief.
We have reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and the pro se brief and agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals. Appellant's pro se arguments are legally incorrect or rely on facts not in the record.
The judgments of conviction are affirmed.
Before Justices Powers, Kidd and B. A. Smith
Affirmed on Both Causes
Filed: June 4, 1998
Do Not Publish