Opinion
No. 05-01-01400-CR.
Opinion Filed April 14, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH, Tex.R.App.P. 47.
Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F95-74920-TN. Affirmed.
OPINION PER CURIAM
Jonathan Fitzgerald Reynolds appeals the revocation of his probation. Before a magistrate, appellant entered a negotiated guilty plea to a charge of aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury. The trial court adopted the magistrate's findings and found appellant guilty. The court followed the plea bargain agreement and assessed punishment at ten years' imprisonment, probated for five years, and a $500 fine. Subsequently, the State filed a motion to revoke probation. After a hearing, the trial court found the State's lone allegation true, revoked appellant's probation, and assessed punishment at ten years' imprisonment and a $495.36 fine. Appellant's attorney 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 (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 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant he has a right to file a pro se response. Appellant, however, did not file a pro se response. We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief. 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.