In the Matter of S. L.--Appeal from 98th District Court of Travis County

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-97-00414-CV
In the Matter of S. L.
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 98TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. J-16,676, HONORABLE W. JEANNE MEURER, JUDGE PRESIDING
PER CURIAM

This is an appeal from an order placing a juvenile on probation. We will affirm the trial court's order.

 
BACKGROUND

On December 6, 1996, S. L., a sixteen-year-old girl, allegedly engaged in delinquent conduct by committing the offense of assault by hitting another girl in her high school class several times. On April 1, 1997, an adjudication hearing was held. After hearing evidence and the arguments of counsel, the court found that S. L. committed the alleged assault. On April 15, 1997, a disposition hearing was held. After hearing evidence and the arguments of counsel, the court placed S. L. on probation for six months.

 
DISCUSSION

S. L.'s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a brief asserting that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel's brief complies with the requirements for such briefs discussed in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). (1) Counsel states that she has diligently searched the record and has researched the law applicable to the facts and issues contained in the case. Counsel further states that she has investigated the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence presented, whether the trial court properly followed all statutory warnings and procedures, and whether S. L. was afforded effective assistance of counsel. The State agrees that the appeal is frivolous.

We have conducted our own review of the record and concur with the assessment by S. L.'s attorney and the State. We find no meritorious grounds for appeal.

We affirm the trial court's order.

 

Before Justices Powers, Aboussie, and B. A. Smith

Affirmed

Filed: March 26, 1998

Do Not Publish

1. We recognize that the Anders brief is a creature of criminal law. In cases such as this, however, we believe that this Court may consider the representation of appointed counsel that this appeal is frivolous.