Raymond Frank Jimenez v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 368th District Court of Williamson County

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS,
AT AUSTIN
NO. 3-91-074-CR
RAYMOND FRANK JIMENEZ,

APPELLANT

 
vs.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE

 
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 368TH JUDICIAL
DISTRICTNO. 90-476-K277, HONORABLE BURT CARNES, JUDGE

PER CURIAM

This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction for aggravated sexual assault. Tex. Penal Code Ann. 22.021 (Supp. 1992). The punishment is imprisonment for forty-five years. Judgment was rendered after the revocation of appellant's deferred adjudication probation.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is 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 demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

 

[Before Justices Powers, Jones and Kidd]

Affirmed

Filed: February 5, 1992

[Do Not Publish]