TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-97-00578-CR
Ignacio Benitez, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 0973159, HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING
PER CURIAMA jury found appellant guilty of aggravated assault and burglary of a habitation. Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 22.02(a)(2), 30.02(a)(1) (West 1994). The jury assessed punishment at imprisonment for eighteen years and a $1000 fine.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by advancing a contention which counsel says might arguably support the appeal. 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). 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 reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. A discussion of the contention advanced in counsel's brief would serve no beneficial purpose.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Before Justices Aboussie, Jones and Kidd
Affirmed
Filed: April 24, 1998
Do Not Publish