Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 7, 2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-10-00914-CR

____________

CHARLES DWAYNE BALL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1220513

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to sexual assault of a child pursuant to a plea bargain agreement for deferred adjudication probation.  On August 27, 2010, the trial court adjudicated appellant’s guilt and sentenced him to confinement for four years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes 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 and 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 counsel’s brief 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).  Appellant received the record on March 8, 2011.  As of this date, more than forty-five days has passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Jamison, and McCally.

Do Not Publish — Tex.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