Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 10, 2023.

In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-21-00683-CR KEVIN JERMAIN BURRELL, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 248th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1568829 MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction for invasive visual recording.

See Tex. Penal Code § 21.15(b)(2). 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 (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, 811–13 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1978).

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant, who filed a pro se response, but the response provides no arguable grounds for appeal. Instead, the response refers to factual matters outside of the record, and indicates that appellant is seeking other relief through an application for writ of habeas corpus.

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s response and we 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).

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise and Hassan.

Do Not Publish — Tex.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