Appellant pleaded no contest to an indictment accusing him of attempted murder. After finding that the evidence substantiated appellant's guilt, the district court deferred further proceedings and placed him on community supervision. Later, after a hearing on the State's motion, the court revoked supervision, adjudicated appellant guilty, and assessed punishment at imprisonment for twenty years.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding 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); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). 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. Appellant wrote a letter to this Court that we have considered as a pro se brief.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Appellant urges that he acted in self-defense, and that he pleaded no contest out of ignorance arising from ineffective assistance of counsel. There is no support in the record for this claim.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and Kidd

Affirmed

Filed: December 4, 1997

Do Not Publish