Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 15, 2009.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-08-00406-CR
____________
TRINH NGOC NGUYEN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 184th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1105142
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant entered a plea of guilty to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. On June 12, 2007, the trial court deferred a finding of guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for four years. The State later moved to adjudicate appellant=s guilt, alleging several violations of the terms of the community supervision order. After a hearing on April 28, 2008, the trial court adjudicated appellant=s guilt and sentenced him to confinement for three years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a timely written 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 and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-12 (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, more than sixty days has elapsed and 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. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Anderson and Seymore.
Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).