Opinion issued November 4, 2004

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NOS. 01-04-00025-CR

          01-04-00026-CR

____________

WENDELL D. BROOKS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 351st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 954927 and 934192

MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant, Wendell D. Brooks, pleaded guilty to two separate offenses of aggravated robbery. After preparation of a presentence investigation report, the trial court assessed punishment at 45 years’ confinement in each case. We affirm.

               Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that these appeals are without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record that demonstrates the lack of arguable grounds of error. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d).

               Counsel represents that he served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeals are without merit.

               We therefore affirm the judgments of the trial court.

               We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Taft, Jennings, and Bland.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).