
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS,

AT AUSTIN

 


NO. 3-92-473-CR


JESSE PEREZ,

	APPELLANT

vs.



THE STATE OF TEXAS,

	APPELLEE

 

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY, 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 92-073, HONORABLE CHARLES R. RAMSAY, JUDGE PRESIDING
 



PER CURIAM
	Appellant pleaded guilty to possessing less than twenty-eight grams of cocaine, a
controlled substance, with intent to deliver.  Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.112 (West
1992).  The district court assessed punishment at imprisonment for twenty-five years.
	Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which she 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 Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Aboussie and Jones]
Affirmed
Filed:  April 21, 1993
[Do Not Publish]
