TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. J-16282, HONORABLE JOHN K. DIETZ, JUDGE PRESIDING
M.R.P., a juvenile, was adjudged delinquent and placed on probation after pleading true to allegations that he engaged in delinquent activity by committing the offenses of assault and criminal trespass. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 22.01, 30.05 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). At a subsequent hearing on the State's motion to modify disposition, M.R.P. pleaded true to the alleged violations of probation. The juvenile court found that M.R.P. had violated the terms of his probation and committed him to the custody of the Texas Youth Commission. M.R.P. gave notice of appeal from the order modifying disposition. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 56.01(c)(1)(C) (West 1996).
M.R.P.'s appointed counsel on appeal filed a brief asserting that the appeal is frivolous. The brief complies with the requirements for such briefs discussed in In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 296 (Tex. 1998), and, more generally, in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel states that he has diligently examined the record and researched the law applicable to the facts and issues in the case. Counsel's brief contains a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no meritorious errors to be advanced. A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to M.R.P. and to his parent, and they were advised of their right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. A pro se brief was not filed.
We have independently reviewed the record and agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous. The order is affirmed.
Before Justices Jones, B. A. Smith and Yeakel
Affirmed
Filed: May 13, 1999
Do Not Publish