In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-13-00071-CR ____________________ TIMOTHY QUINTEN BALDWIN, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _______________________________________________________ ______________ On Appeal from the 260th District Court Orange County, Texas Trial Cause No. D120021-R ________________________________________________________ _____________ MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury found Timothy Quinten Baldwin guilty of the offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of fourteen (enhanced by a prior felony conviction), and assessed punishment at fifty years in prison. Baldwin’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes that the case presents no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. 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). Baldwin filed a pro se brief in response.

The Court of Criminal Appeals has held that we need not address the merits of issues raised in Anders briefs or pro se responses. Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Rather, an appellate court may determine that: (1) “the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error”; or (2) “arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues.” Id. We have determined that no arguable issues support Baldwin’s appeal. We have independently examined the clerk’s and reporter’s records, and we agree that no arguable issues support an appeal. 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.

_________________________ LEANNE JOHNSON Justice Submitted on January 3, 2014 Opinion Delivered January 15, 2014 Do Not Publish Before Kreger, Horton and Johnson, JJ.

Baldwin may challenge our decision by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.