Affirmed and Opinion filed March 27, 2003.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-02-01006-CR
____________
WILLIE CANNON NELSON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 232nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 591,943
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child after a jury trial and sentenced to confinement for forty-five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice on June 19, 1991. Appellant later filed a motion for forensic DNA testing under Chapter 64 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. On August 23, 2002, after a hearing, the trial court entered written findings of fact and conclusions of law and denied the application. Appellant filed a timely 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 (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 March 27, 2003.
Panel consists of Chief Justice Brister and Justices Fowler and Edelman.
Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).