PER CURIAM

Appellant pleaded guilty and judicially confessed to engaging in organized criminal activity. Act of May 27, 1991, 72d Leg., R.S., ch. 555, § 1, 1991 Tex. Gen. Laws 1968, 1969 (Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 71.02, since amended). The district court found that the evidence substantiated appellant's guilt, deferred further proceedings, and placed appellant on probation. Later, on the State's motion, the court revoked appellant's probation, adjudicated him guilty, and assessed punishment at imprisonment for seventeen years.

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 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 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 5, 1995

Do Not Publish