Affirmed and Opinion filed December 5, 2002.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-02-00423-CR
____________
RONALD GAUTHIER, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 248th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 711,890
O P I N I O N
On June 30, 1997, following a jury trial, appellant was convicted of the offense of murder and sentenced to ten years= confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal JusticeBInstitutional Division, probated. On January 11, 2002, the State filed a motion to revoke alleging appellant violated the terms and conditions of his probation. On March 21, 2002, the trial court granted the State=s motion to revoke and sentenced appellant to confinement for ten years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a notice of appeal.
Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Judgment rendered and Opinion filed December 5, 2002.
Panel consists of Justices Yates, Anderson, and Frost.
Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).