MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Longoria Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Valdez Appellant, Joseph Dwain Mason, pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea bargain agreement with the State to the second-degree felony offense of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02 (West 2011). The trial court placed appellant on deferred adjudication probation. Subsequently, the State filed a motion to proceed to adjudication of guilt. Appellant entered a plea of “true” to the State’s allegations that he had violated the terms of probation. The trial court granted the State’s motion, found appellant guilty of the charged offense, and set punishment at ten years’ confinement. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. Appellant’s appellate counsel, concluding that the appeal in this cause is frivolous, filed an Anders brief, in which he reviewed the merits, or lack thereof, of the appeal. We affirm. ^[1]

I. ANDERS BRIEF

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), appellant’s appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief stating that after carefully reviewing the appellate record, he was unable to find any “point of error that can be supported by the record” and “has reached the conclusion that there are no arguable grounds to be raised to support an appeal of this cause and the appeal is frivolous.” Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a professional evaluation demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to advance on appeal. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 n.9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (AIn Texas, an Anders brief need not specifically advance >arguable= points of error if counsel finds none, but it must provide record references to the facts and procedural history and set out pertinent legal authorities.@) (citing Hawkins v. State, 112 S.W.3d 340, 343–44 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.)); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978), appellant’s counsel has carefully discussed why, under controlling authority, there are no errors in the trial court’s judgment. Counsel has demonstrated that he has complied with the requirements of Anders by (1) examining the record and finding no arguable grounds to advance on appeal, (2) serving a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw as counsel on appellant, and (3) informing appellant of his right to review the record and to file a pro se response. ^[2] See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 510 n.3; see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409 n.23. More than an adequate period of time has passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se response. ^[3] See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409.

II. INDEPENDENT REVIEW

Upon receiving an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of all the proceedings to determine whether the case is wholly frivolous. Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). We have reviewed the entire record and counsel’s brief; however, we have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (ADue to the nature of Anders briefs, by indicating in the opinion that it considered the issues raised in the briefs and reviewed the record for reversible error but found none, the court of appeals met the requirement of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1.@); Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 509. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

III. MOTION TO WITHDRAW

In accordance with Anders, appellant’s attorney has asked this Court for permission to withdraw as counsel. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 408 n.17 (citing Jeffery v. State, 903 S.W.2d 776, 779–80 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1995, no pet.) (AIf an attorney believes the appeal is frivolous, he must withdraw from representing the appellant. To withdraw from representation, the appointed attorney must file a motion to withdraw accompanied by a brief showing the appellate court that the appeal is frivolous.@) (citations omitted)). We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw that was carried with the case on September 13, 2013. Within five days of the date of this Court’s opinion, counsel is ordered to send a copy of the opinion and judgment to appellant and advise him of his right to file a petition for discretionary review. ^[4] See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4; see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 412 n.35; Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670, 673 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)

__________________ ROGELIO VALDEZ Chief Justice Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 5th day of December, 2013.