TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
NO. 1010906, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING
Appellant Charles Myles pleaded guilty to possessing less than one gram of cocaine in a drug-free zone. Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. §§ 481.115(a), (b), .134(d) (West Supp. 2003). He was adjudged guilty and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment, but imposition of sentence was suspended and he was placed on community supervision. He now appeals from an order revoking supervision and imposing sentence.
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 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). 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. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.
W. Kenneth Law, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed: March 20, 2003
Do Not Publish