TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

---

NO. 03-00-00622-CR

---

William Leo Peevy, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

---

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 50,018, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

---

Appellant William Leo Peevy was convicted following his plea of guilty to aggravated sexual assault. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.021 (West Supp. 2000). As called for in a plea bargain agreement, the district court 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. 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. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

__________________________________________

Lee Yeakel, Justice

Before Justices Kidd, Yeakel and Jones^*

Affirmed

Filed: January 11, 2001

Do Not Publish

^* Before J. Woodfin Jones, Justice (former), Third Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 75.003(a)(1) (West 1998).