NO. 07-01-0394-R IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL C JANUARY 2, 2003 ______________________________

FRANK LEROY GAINES, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________ FROM THE 137TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY; NO. 95-420458; HONORABLE BLAIR CHERRY, JUDGE _______________________________ Before QUINN and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ.

Appellant Frank Leroy Gaines appeals from a judgment revoking his community supervision, adjudicating him guilty of aggravated sexual assault and assessing punishment of incarceration for 35 years. We affirm.

Pursuant to a plea bargain, on April 14, 1998, appellant entered a plea of guilty to a charge of aggravated sexual assault. The trial court found that the evidence substantiated appellant’s guilt, accepted the guilty plea, deferred adjudication of guilt and sentenced appellant to ten years community supervision.

On June 26 and 27, 2001, the trial court heard the State’s Amended Motion to Proceed with Adjudication of Guilt and motion to revoke appellant’s probation. The trial court found that appellant violated his probation terms, revoked appellant’s community supervision and adjudicated him guilty of aggravated sexual assault. The trial court ordered a pre-sentence report and set a separate hearing for sentencing. On September 13, 2001, the trial court held a sentencing hearing, following which appellant was sentenced to incarceration for 35 years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a general notice of appeal.

Counsel for appellant has filed a Motion to Withdraw and a Brief in Support thereof.

In support of the motion to withdraw, counsel has certified that, in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), the record has been diligently reviewed and that in the opinion of counsel, the record reflects no reversible error or grounds upon which a non-frivolous appeal can arguably be predicated.

Counsel thus concludes that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has discussed why, under the controlling authorities, there is no reversible error in the trial court proceedings or judgment. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978).

Counsel has attached exhibits showing that a copy of the Anders brief and Motion to Withdraw have been forwarded to appellant, and that counsel has appropriately advised

appellant of appellant’s right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s motion and brief. Appellant has not filed a response to counsel’s motion and brief.

We have made an independent examination of the record to determine whether there are any arguable grounds for appeal. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed 2d 300 (1988); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). We have found no such grounds. We agree that the appeal is frivolous.

Accordingly, counsel’s Motion to Withdraw is granted. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Phil Johnson Justice

Do not publish.