In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-11-00585-CR _________________ CHIDOZIE ROBERT OBIALOR, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee ________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 10-09878 ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In carrying out a plea bargain agreement, Chidozie Robert Obialor1 pled guilty to aggravated assault. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02 (West 2011). The trial court deferred adjudicating Obialor’s guilt, placed Obialor on community supervision for five years, and assessed a fine of $500.

Before Obialor successfully finished serving the term imposed by the community supervision order, the State filed a motion asking the trial court to revoke the community The record reflects that the defendant is also known as Chidoze Robert Obialor, Chidozie Obialor, Chidozie Robert Obialor, Jr., and Chidozies Robert Obialor. supervision order. At the hearing on the motion to revoke, Obialor pled “true” to having violated several of the conditions of the community supervision order. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court found that Obialor violated the community supervision order, revoked Obialor’s community supervision, found Obialor guilty of aggravated assault, and sentenced Obialor to serve a term of twenty years in prison.

On appeal, Obialor’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 May 17, 2012, we granted an extension of time for the appellant to file a pro se brief. Obialor has not filed a response.

We have 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. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.2 AFFIRMED.

___________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice Submitted on September 4, 2012 Opinion Delivered October 24, 2012 Do Not Publish Before Gaultney, Kreger, and Horton, JJ.

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