Appellant pleaded guilty to an indictment accusing him of burglary of a habitation. The district court found that the evidence substantiated appellant's guilt and, pursuant to a plea bargain, deferred further proceedings and placed appellant on community supervision. Later, on the State's motion, the court revoked supervision, adjudicated appellant guilty, and sentenced him to imprisonment for twenty-five years. Appellant filed a general notice of appeal. See Watson v. State, 924 S.W.2d 711 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996).

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. 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, Aboussie and B. A. Smith

Affirmed

Filed: January 15, 1998

Do Not Publish