IN THE INTEREST OF JUVENILE v. << (2017)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal concerns the trial court's decision to adjudicate appellant O.M. delinquent for the offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child in violation of section 22.021(a)(2)(B) of the Texas Penal Code.

On March 27, 2014, the Dallas County District Attorney's Office filed a petition regarding a child engaged in delinquent conduct against O.M., alleging he violated section 22.021 of the Penal Code. On April 8, 2016, the trial court found the allegation against O.M. to be true and declared him to be “a Child Engaged in Delinquent Conduct.” On April 18, 2016, the court held a disposition hearing and placed O.M. on a two-year term of probation in the custody of his mother.

O.M. filed a notice of appeal. His court-appointed counsel has filed an Anders brief on his behalf, concluding after a diligent review of the record that his appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); see also In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 296, 297 (Tex. 1998) (orig. proceeding) (Anders procedures apply to appeals from juvenile delinquency adjudications). In reviewing an Anders brief, our duty is to determine whether there are any arguable grounds for reversal and, if there are, to remand the case to the trial court for the appointment of new counsel. Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); In re D.D., 279 S.W.3d 849, 850 (Tex. App.––Dallas 2009, pet. denied). The Anders brief filed by O.M.'s appellate counsel presents a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for reversal.

On May 2, 2017, this Court sent O.M. a copy of the brief and notified him of his right to review the appellate record and file a pro se response. We told O.M. that if he desired to review the record and file a response, he should write this Court by May 17, 2017 and make such a request. We received no response. We have reviewed the entire record and the brief. The record does not reflect any arguable grounds for reversal, and we conclude O.M.'s appeal is frivolous and without merit.

We affirm the trial court's judgment.

LANA MYERS JUSTICE