                                     In The

                               Court of Appeals
                   Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                               ________________

                              NO. 09-14-00211-CR
                               ________________

                 BOBBY MITCHELL ZACHERY, Appellant

                                       V.

                   THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
__________________________________________________________________

                On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
                       Jefferson County, Texas
                       Trial Cause No. 11-11234
__________________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Bobby Mitchell Zachery

pleaded guilty to failure to comply with sex offender registration requirements.

The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Zachery guilty, but deferred

further proceedings, placed Zachery on community supervision for five years, and

assessed a fine of $500. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Zachery’s

unadjudicated community supervision. Zachery pleaded “true” to three violations

of the conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found that Zachery

                                        1
had violated the conditions of his community supervision, found Zachery guilty of

failure to comply with sex offender registration requirements, and assessed

punishment at five years of confinement.

      Zachery’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional

evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.

1978). On July 14, 2014, we granted an extension of time for Zachery to file a pro

se brief. We received no response from Zachery. We have reviewed the appellate

record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support an

appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to

re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1

      AFFIRMED.

                                      ________________________________
                                              STEVE McKEITHEN
                                                  Chief Justice

Submitted on October 15, 2014
Opinion Delivered November 12, 2014
Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
      1
        Zachery may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
                                           2
