TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-03-00032-CR

George Alford Heidleberg, Jr., Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY, 265TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. F-0155561-IR, HONORABLE KEITH T. DEAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant George Alford Heidleberg, Jr., was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision after he pleaded guilty to aggravated assault. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.02(a)(2) (West 2003). At a subsequent hearing on the State’s motion to adjudicate, appellant pleaded true to the alleged violations of supervision. The court adjudged him guilty and sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment.

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 he 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. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

____________________________________________ Mack Kidd, Justice Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Kidd and Puryear Affirmed Filed: December 4, 2003 Do Not Publish