TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-09-00470-CR

Gelacio Perez Lozada, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MILAM COUNTY, 20TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. CR21,263, HONORABLE ED MAGRE, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In August 2006, appellant Gelacio Perez Lozada pleaded guilty to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02 (West Supp. 2009). The trial court deferred adjudication and placed appellant on community supervision for ten years. In June 2009, following a hearing on the State’s motion to adjudicate, the court adjudged appellant guilty and imposed a sentence of eighteen years’ imprisonment.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); 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). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

__________________________________________ J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Waldrop Affirmed Filed: May 5, 2010 Do Not Publish