Opinion
NO. 14-12-00909-CR
05-09-2013
DAVID EARL STANLEY, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 9, 2013.
On Appeal from the 411th District Court
Polk County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 19197
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant was convicted of the offense of arson and placed under community supervision for ten years. Subsequently, the State filed a motion to revoke community supervision. Following a hearing, the trial court found appellant had violated the terms of his community supervision, granted the motion to revoke, and sentenced appellant to confinement for ten years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a notice of appeal.
Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement 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 (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. (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. 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 Justices Brown, Christopher, and McCally. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).