In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-14-00440-CV
____________________
IN THE INTEREST OF D.O.R. JR., A.B.B. AND J.L.
_______________________________________________________ ______________
On Appeal from the County Court at Law
Polk County, Texas
Trial Cause No. PC05722
________________________________________________________ _____________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this parental-rights termination case, a jury found that Mother’s parent-
child relationships to her minor children, D.O.R. Jr., A.B.B., and J.L., should be
terminated.1 See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(1)(D), (E) (West 2014). The jury
also found that it was in the children’s best interest to terminate Mother’s parental-
rights with respect to these three children. See id. § 161.001(2) (West 2014). Based
1
We identify the minors by their initials to protect their identities. See Tex.
R. App. P. 9.8. Other family members are identified, as necessary, based on their
respective relationships to the children being discussed.
1
on the jury’s verdict, the trial court rendered a judgment terminating Mother’s
parental-rights to D.O.R. Jr., A.B.B., and J.L.
In the appeal, the brief filed by Mother’s court-appointed appellate counsel
suggests that no arguable grounds exist to support arguments which would result in
reversing the jury’s verdict. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); In
re L.D.T., 161 S.W.3d 728, 731 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2005, no pet.). The brief
reflects counsel’s professional evaluation of the record. The record before us also
reflects that counsel served Mother with a copy of the Anders brief, moved to
withdraw, and requested that Mother be provided an opportunity to file a pro se
response. On October 30, 2014, we notified Mother that her response was due on
November 19, 2014, but she did not file a pro se response.
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the trial court record. We conclude
that no arguable grounds for appeal exist; therefore, we affirm the trial court’s
judgment.
We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 2
AFFIRMED.
2
In connection with withdrawing from the case, counsel shall inform Mother
of the result of this appeal and that she has the right to file a petition for review
with the Texas Supreme Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 53; In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d 66,
68 n.3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.).
2
________________________________
HOLLIS HORTON
Justice
Submitted on December 10, 2014
Opinion Delivered January 15, 2015
Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
3