Edelmiro Javier Elizondo v. State

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-94-00553-CR

Edelmiro Javier Elizondo, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY, 194TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. F-9244825-SM, HONORABLE HAROLD ENTZ, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

This is an appeal from an order revoking probation. Appellant was placed on probation following his conviction for burglary of a building. The punishment is imprisonment for three years.

Appellant's 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. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. 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 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 order revoking probatino is affirmed.

Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Aboussie and Jones

Affirmed

Filed: June 21, 1995

Do Not Publish