Opinion
No. 05-06-00192-CR
Opinion Filed November 15, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F04-55320-LR. Affirm.
Before Justices MORRIS, WHITTINGTON, and RICHTER.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Demarcus Montrez Kirk pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery and true to one enhancement paragraph, and was placed on community supervision for ten years. The trial judge deferred adjudicating appellant's guilt, placed him on ten years' community supervision, and assessed a fine of $2500. The State later moved to adjudicate guilt, alleging he violated several conditions of community supervision. Following a hearing, the trial judge found the allegations true, adjudicated appellant guilty, found the enhancement paragraph true and assessed punishment at fifteen years' imprisonment. Appellant's attorney filed a brief concluding the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We informed appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a response. We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We affirm the trial court's judgment.