<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="WordPerfect 9">
<TITLE></TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY TEXT="#000000" LINK="#0000ff" VLINK="#551a8b" ALINK="#ff0000" BGCOLOR="#c0c0c0">

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-size: 14pt"><STRONG><CENTER>TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN</STRONG></SPAN></CENTER>
</P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<P><STRONG><CENTER>NO. 03-96-00070-CR</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<P><STRONG><CENTER></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>Charles Lopez, Jr., Appellant</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>v.</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>The State of Texas, Appellee</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times" STYLE="font-size: 11pt"><STRONG><CENTER>FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MILAM COUNTY, 20TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT</CENTER>
</STRONG></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times" STYLE="font-size: 11pt"><STRONG><CENTER>NO. 18,594, HONORABLE CHARLES E. LANCE, JUDGE PRESIDING</STRONG></SPAN><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times"><STRONG></CENTER>
</STRONG></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times"><STRONG><CENTER></CENTER>
</STRONG></SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times"><STRONG>PER CURIAM</STRONG></SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">	This is an appeal from an order revoking community supervision.  Appellant was
placed on community supervision following his conviction for burglary of a building.  Penal
Code, 63d Leg., R.S., ch. 399, sec. 1, § 30.02, 1973 Tex. Gen. Laws 883, 926 (Tex. Penal Code
Ann. § 30.02, since amended). The punishment is imprisonment for ten years.</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">	Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the
appeal is frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of <EM>Anders v. California</EM>,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why
there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  <EM>See also</EM> <EM>Penson v. Ohio</EM>, 488 U.S. 75 (1988);
<EM>Gainous v. State</EM>, 436  S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); <EM>Jackson v. State</EM>, 485  S.W.2d 553
(Tex. Crim. App. 1972); <EM>Currie v. State</EM>, 516  S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); <EM>High v.
State</EM>, 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.</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">	We have 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.</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">	The judgment of conviction is affirmed.</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Before Justices Powers, Jones and B. A. Smith</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Affirmed</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Filed:   August 14, 1996</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Do Not Publish</SPAN></P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
