After accepting appellant's pleas of guilty and judicial confessions, the district court found him guilty of burglary of a building, aggravated robbery, and burglary of a habitation. Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 29.03 (West 1994), 30.02 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). The court assessed punishment for the burglary of a building at incarceration for one year and a $500 fine. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.44 (West Supp. 1998). For each of the other offenses, the court assessed punishment at imprisonment for twenty years and a $2500 fine.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed briefs concluding that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. The briefs meet 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). Copies of counsel's briefs were 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 records and counsel's briefs and agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the records that might arguably support the appeals.

The judgments of conviction are affirmed.

Before Justices Powers, Kidd and B. A. Smith

Affirmed

Filed: August 13, 1998

Do Not Publish