TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-07-00135-CR
Jerret Anthony Gomez, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 54292, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Jerret Anthony Gomez pleaded no contest to sexual assault and was placed
on deferred adjudication supervision. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.011 (West Supp. 2006). The
State subsequently moved to adjudicate, and appellant pleaded true to most of the allegations in the
motion. The court adjudged him guilty and assessed punishment, enhanced by previous felony
convictions, at life imprisonment.
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). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and 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. Counsel’s
motion to withdraw is granted.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
___________________________________________
W. Kenneth Law, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Waldrop and Henson
Affirmed
Filed: November 15, 2007
Do Not Publish
2