In Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 102 L. Ed. 2d 300, 109 S. Ct. 346 (1988) the Supreme Court discussed the responsibilities of an appellate court upon receiving a "frivolous appeal" brief. The court stated: "once the appellate court receives this brief, it must then itself conduct 'a full examination of all the proceedings to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.'" In Johnson v. State, appellant's court appointed attorney has filed a brief in which he has concluded that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Anders v. California 386 U.S. 738, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a professional evaluation of why there are no arguable grounds for advancing an appeal. See Stafford v. State 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Lindsey v. State, 902 S.W.2d 9, 11 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi 1995).