The opinion and judgment dated January 15, 1998, are withdrawn.

A jury found appellant guilty of burglary of a habitation. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.02 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). The district court assessed punishment, enhanced by two previous felony convictions, at imprisonment for forty 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. A 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. Appellant's pro se brief is a recital of his innocent version of the relevant events. Appellant did not testify at trial. The evidence before the jury supports its verdict.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and Kidd

Affirmed

Filed: January 23, 1998

Do Not Publish