      TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN


                                      NO. 03-10-00306-CR




                                   Jesus Carvajal, Appellant

                                                 v.

                                  The State of Texas, Appellee



     FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 331ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
           NO. 1011076, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING



                            MEMORANDUM OPINION


               In 2002, a jury found appellant Jesus Carvajal guilty of indecency with a child by

contact and assessed punishment at ten years’ imprisonment. On the jury’s recommendation, the

trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed appellant on community supervision.1 This

is an appeal from a 2010 order revoking supervision and imposing sentence.

               Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a

brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (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,


     1
      The conviction was affirmed on appeal. Carvajal v. State, 03-02-00752-CR (Tex.
App.—Austin Oct. 14, 2004, no pet.) (not designated for publication).
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. See

Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No pro se brief has been filed.

               We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Garner v. State,

300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to withdraw

is granted.

               The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.




                                             J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Affirmed

Filed: October 14, 2010

Do Not Publish




                                                2
