In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-11-00617-CR _________________ WILLIE EARL STEWART, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee ________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 75th District Court Liberty County, Texas Trial Cause No. CR28533 ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Following a jury trial, appellant, Willie Earl Stewart, was convicted of murder.

See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 19.02(b) (West 2011). Stewart was sentenced by the jury to confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for life. The jury assessed a fine in the amount of $10,000. This appeal followed.

Stewart’s appellate 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 1 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On September 6, 2012, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Stewart.

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. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1 AFFIRMED.

___________________________ CHARLES KREGER Justice Submitted on December 28, 2012 Opinion Delivered January 23, 2013 Do not publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.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.