
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN




NO. 03-05-00554-CR




Kenneth King, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee




FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 331ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 3013128, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING




M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N
 
In July 2002, appellant Kenneth King was placed on deferred adjudication community
supervision after he pleaded guilty to attempted burglary of a habitation.  See Tex. Pen. Code Ann.
§§ 15.01, 30.02 (West 2003).  Three years later, following a hearing on the State’s motion, the trial
court adjudicated appellant guilty and sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding 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); High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);
Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1969).  Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and 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 reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous
and without merit.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
 
 
                                                __________________________________________
                                                W. Kenneth Law, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson and Pemberton
Affirmed
Filed:   August 11, 2006
Do Not Publish
