WALLACE WILLIAM BRANTLEY,FROM A DISTRICT COURT APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT DALLAS
NO. 05-88-00107-CR
WALLACE WILLIAM BRANTLEY,FROM A DISTRICT COURT
 
                APPELLANT,
 
v.
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
 
                APPELLEE.OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
 
 
 
BEFORE JUSTICES HOWELL, ROWE AND KINKEADE
OPINION PER CURIAM
SEPTEMBER 14, 1989
        Wallace William Brantley appeals his conviction for aggravated robbery. Punishment was assessed at sixty years' confinement.
        Appellant's attorney has filed a brief in which appellant's attorney has concluded that 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 demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel raises one arguable point of error, claiming that the in-court identification of appellant was tainted by an unduly suggestive pretrial photographic lineup. In addition, appellant has filed a pro se brief pressing the same argument.
        Counsel for appellant and appellant himself both argue that the photographic lineup was unduly suggestive because only one person depicted was wearing the clothing which the complainant claimed his robber was wearing at the time of the offense. There is, however, no evidence in the record to support the claim that only one photograph depicted a person wearing a blue and white striped shirt.
        The photographs are not in the record before us. They were initially offered into evidence by the State, but the photographs were not admitted into evidence because the State withdrew its offer. Appellant did not seek the admission of the photographs for purposes of the record. Matters not introduced into evidence are not part of the record on direct appeal. Killingsworth v. State, 654 S.W.2d 724, 725 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1983, pet. ref'd). Although defense counsel asked the complainant, "of all of the pictures that the police showed you, there is only one man wearing a blue and white shirt; is that right," the complainant replied, "I don't know." Thus, the record does not establish appellant's claim that the photographic lineup was unduly suggestive. It is appellant's burden to see that a sufficient record is presented to show error requiring reversal. TEX. R. APP. P. 50(d). The arguable point and appellant's pro se point are overruled.
        We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
        The judgment is affirmed.
 
 
                                                          PER CURIAM
 
DO NOT PUBLISH
TEX. R. APP. P. 90
 
880107.U05
 
 
File Date[09-14-89]
File Name[880107]