Affirmed and Opinion filed February 27, 2003.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-02-00618-CR
____________
JEFFERY PAUL YATES, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 174th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 735,577
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant entered a plea of no contest to the offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child. On March 13, 1997, the trial court deferred a finding a guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for eight years. The State filed a motion to adjudicate on April 14, 2000, but subsequently dismissed the motion. The State again filed a motion to adjudicate on December 4, 2000, and an amended motion on March 23, 2001. After a hearing, the trial court denied the amended motion to adjudicate. The State filed another motion to adjudicate in March of 2001, and then filed an amended motion on April 8, 2002. On May 15, 2002, after a plea of true, the trial court found appellant guilty and sentenced him to confinement for twenty-five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and a $500.00 fine. Appellant filed a pro se 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 February 27, 2003.
Panel consists of Justices Yates, Hudson, and Frost.
Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).