Opinion issued January 8, 2004

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-03-00438-CR

____________

RAYMOND CHARLES EVERHART, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 946266

MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant, Raymond Charles Everhart, was convicted by a jury of possession of cocaine in an amount less than one gram. The jury assessed punishment at confinement in State jail for two years. We affirm.

               Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The 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 and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds of error to be advanced. 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).

               The brief states that a copy was delivered to appellant, whom counsel advised by letter 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 appeal is wholly frivolous.

               We affirm the judgment 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 Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Keyes and Hanks.

Do not publish.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