      TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN


                                      NO. 03-08-00630-CR



                                Scott Anthony Gunn, Appellant

                                                 v.

                                  The State of Texas, Appellee


   FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LAMPASAS COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
            NO. 8161, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING



                            MEMORANDUM OPINION


               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 response.

               After reviewing the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s pro se response, we agree

that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably
support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

              The judgment of conviction is affirmed.




                                           __________________________________________

                                           Diane M. Henson, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Waldrop and Henson

Affirmed

Filed: October 28, 2009

Do Not Publish




                                              2
