TINAKO HARRISON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Appellant Tinako Harrison appeals his conviction for aggravated assault of a family member. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.02 (West 2011). Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes 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 and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was sent a copy of the appellate record, and he filed a pro se response to the brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and appellant's pro se response and agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.