APPELLANT

APPELLEE

PER CURIAM

After accepting appellant's plea of guilty and judicial confession, the district court found him guilty of delivering less than twenty-eight grams of cocaine, a controlled substance. Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.112 (West 1992). The court assessed punishment at imprisonment for forty-five years.

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. 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 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 Justices Powers, Aboussie and B. A. Smith]

Affirmed

Filed: January 27, 1993

[Do Not Publish]