PER CURIAM

Appellant was tried on an indictment accusing him of three counts of aggravated assault. On count one, the jury found appellant guilty of the lesser included offense of misdemeanor assault. On count two, the jury found appellant guilty as alleged. On count three, the jury found appellant not guilty. The district court assessed punishment on count two, enhanced by previous felony convictions, at imprisonment for seventy-five years. The court did not assess punishment on count one and it was subsequently dismissed on the State's motion.

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 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, Kidd and B. A. Smith

Affirmed

Filed: May 17, 1995

Do Not Publish