Opinion
No. 08-04-00248-CR
October 13, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 210th District Court of El Paso County, Texas, (Tc# 20040D00471).
Before BARAJAS, C.J., McCLURE, and CHEW, JJ.
OPINION
This is an appeal from a jury conviction for the offense of theft (enhanced). The jury assessed punishment at eight and one-half years' imprisonment and a fine of $3,500. We affirm. Appellant's court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which she has concluded that 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, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87 S.Ct. 2094, 18 L.Ed.2d 1377 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Crim.App. 1969). A copy of counsel's brief and the appellate record as well as pertinent case law have been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of his right to file a pro se brief. Appellant has filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. A discussion of the matter discussed in counsel's brief and the pro se brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. The judgment is affirmed.