Daniel Robert Garmong entered a non-negotiated guilty plea to a three-count indictment for the state jail felony offense of delivery of a dangerous drug (carisoprodol) and two controlled substances in Penalty Group Three (alprazolam and dihydrocodeinone). See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. §§ 481.114(b), 483.042(a), (d) (Vernon 2003); Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 12.35(a) (Vernon Supp. 2007). The trial court convicted Garmong and imposed concurrent sentences of two years of confinement in the state jail facility of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Correctional Institutions Division.

On appeal, Garmong's counsel filed a brief that presents counsel's professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On October 18, 2007, we granted an extension of time for the appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from appellant.

We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court's judgment. ⁽¹⁾

AFFIRMED.

____________________________

STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice

Submitted on February 5, 2008

Opinion Delivered February 13, 2008

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.

1. Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.