Opinion
No. 05-10-01199-CR
Opinion Filed May 31, 2011. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47.
On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F06-99727-T.
Before Justices O'NEILL, FRANCIS, and MYERS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Benjamin Holmes's juvenile probation following conviction for indecency with a child was transferred to the trial court in February 2007. In July 2010, the State moved to revoke appellant's community supervision for failing to submit to a polygraph examination and being unsuccessfully discharged from sex offender treatment. In a hearing on the motion, appellant pleaded true to the violations. The trial court found the allegations true, granted the motion to revoke, and reduced appellant's original sentence of ten years to three years' imprisonment. On appeal, 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, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (court of appeals's duty is to determine whether there are any arguable issues, and, if so, to remand the case to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to address those issues). 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.