Opinion
No. 05-04-00147-CR
Opinion issued January 24, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F98-53237-Jqj. Affirmed.
Before Justices RICHTER, LANG, and MAZZANT.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Preston Scott Sandifer waived a jury trial and pleaded guilty to theft, with two prior theft convictions. Appellant also pleaded true to two enhancement paragraphs. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the trial court deferred adjudicating guilt, placed appellant on ten years' community supervision, and assessed a $500 fine. The State later moved to proceed with adjudication of guilt, alleging appellant violated the terms of his community supervision. The trial court found the allegations true, adjudicated appellant guilty, and sentenced him to fifteen years' imprisonment. 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 he has a right to file a pro se response, but appellant 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.