In the Matter of D.D.--Appeal from 289th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-05-00737-CV

IN THE MATTER OF D.D.

From the 289th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2005-JUV-00169

Honorable Carmen Kelsey , Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Alma L. L pez , Chief Justice

Sitting: Alma L. L pez , Chief Justice

Catherine Stone , Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion , Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 12, 2006

AFFIRMED

D.D. pled true to engaging in delinquent conduct based on a charge of theft ($500-$1,500) and was placed on probation for nine months. The State subsequently filed a motion to modify the disposition, alleging D.D. violated the conditions of his probation. D.D. pled true to the allegations and was continued on probation. A few months later, the State filed a second motion to modify the disposition, alleging D.D. violated four conditions of his probation. D.D. pled true to two of the allegations in the second motion to modify. The trial court found all four of the allegations to be true. Following a hearing, the trial court revoked D.D.'s probation and ordered him committed to the custody of the Texas Youth Commission.

D.D.'s court-appointed attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. Counsel concludes that the appeal is without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 296, 299 (Tex. 1998) (applying Anders in juvenile proceedings); In re A.L.H., 974 S.W.2d 359, 360-61 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1998, no pet.) (same). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to D.D. and his mother, who were advised of appellant's right to examine the record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed. After reviewing the record and counsel's brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed. Furthermore, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw. Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996, no pet.).

Alma L. L pez , Chief Justice