Pursuant to plea bargain agreements, appellant David Benitez Jr. pled guilty to burglary of a habitation and felony theft. In each case, the trial court found the evidence was sufficient to find Benitez guilty, but deferred finding him guilty. In both cases, the trial court placed Benitez on community supervision for five years and assessed a fine of $500. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Benitez's unadjudicated community supervision in each case. Benitez pled "true" in both cases to three violations of the terms of his community supervision. In each case, the trial court found that Benitez violated the conditions of his community supervision and found him guilty on the underlying charges. In the burglary of a habitation case, the trial court assessed punishment at twenty years of confinement, and in the felony theft case, the trial court assessed punishment at two years of confinement in a state jail facility. The trial court ordered that the sentences were to run consecutively.

Benitez's appellate counsel filed a brief in each case that presents counsel's professional evaluation 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 2, 2008, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief in each case. We received no response from the appellant. We reviewed the appellate records, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support the appeals. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeals. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court's judgments. ⁽¹⁾

AFFIRMED.

__________________________________

CHARLES KREGER

Justice

Submitted on February 11, 2009

Opinion Delivered February 25, 2009

Do not publish

Before Gaultney, Kreger, and Horton, JJ.

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