COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a conviction for the offense of possession of cocaine, enhanced. Appellant pleaded guilty to the jury and the jury assessed punishment at five years' imprisonment. We affirm.

Appellant's court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which she has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 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 has been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of his right to file a pro se brief. He has been further advised that he can obtain the record in this case, and he has been advised that he may request an extension of time to file a brief. Appellant has not filed a pro se brief.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. A discussion of the matters discussed in counsel's brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

The judgment is affirmed.

KENNETH R. CARR, Justice

October 18, 2007

Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Carr, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)