Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 11, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-07-00105-CR

NO. 14-07-00247-CR

____________

ERIC LEVON POWELL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 174th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 1079954, 1079955

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant was convicted by the trial court of deadly conduct (Trial Court Cause No. 1079954, Appeal No. 14-07-00105-CR) and aggravated assault (Trial Court Cause No. 1079955, Appeal No. 14-07-00247-CR).  In both causes, the trial court made an affirmative finding on use of a deadly weapon.  On the conviction for deadly conduct, appellant was sentenced to confinement for ten years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  On the conviction for aggravated assault, appellant was sentenced to confinement for twenty years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  The trial court ordered the sentences to run concurrently.  Appellant filed a notice of appeal in both causes.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in each cause in which he concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The briefs meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of each of counsel=s briefs was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  As of this date, more than sixty days has elapsed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s briefs and agree the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the briefs would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed October 11, 2007.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Yates and Frost.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).