Paul Wallace v. State ( 1991 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS,

AT AUSTIN





NO. 3-90-151-CR



PAUL WALLACE,

APPELLANT

vs.





THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 167TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 101,875, HONORABLE BOB JONES, JUDGE

PER CURIAM

After hearing appellant's plea of guilty, a jury found him guilty of aggravated robbery and assessed punishment at imprisonment for forty years. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 29.03 (Supp. 1991).

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Cr. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Cr. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Cr. App. 1974); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Cr. App. 1978). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

[Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Aboussie and Kidd]

Affirmed

Filed:  September 18, 1991

[Do Not Publish]