i i i i i i
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-08-00740-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF S.M., et al., Children
From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2007-PA-00614
Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Karen Angelini, Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Delivered and Filed: January 28, 2009
AFFIRMED
Crystal G. seeks to appeal the trial court’s termination of her parental rights to her minor
children, S.M., D.R.H., and H.H.,1 and challenges the trial court’s finding that her appeal is
frivolous. See TEX . FAM . CODE ANN . § 263.405(d)(3), (g) (Vernon Supp. 2008). Crystal’s court-
appointed appellate attorney has filed a brief representing that he has conducted a professional
evaluation of the record and determined the appellate points are without merit. Counsel concludes
the appeal is frivolous. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967). See In re R.R., No. 04-03-00096-CV, 2003 WL 21157944, at *4 (Tex. App.—San Antonio
May 21, 2003, order) (applying Anders procedure to appeals from orders terminating parental rights),
1
… To protect the privacy of the parties in this case, we identify the children by their initials and the children’s
mother by her first name only. See T EX . F AM . C O D E A N N . § 109.002(d) (Vernon 2002).
04-08-00740-CV
disp. on merits, 2003 WL 22080522 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 10, 2003, no pet.). In
compliance with the procedure in Anders, counsel delivered a copy of counsel’s brief to Crystal, who
was advised of her right to examine the record and to file her own pro se brief if she disagreed with
counsel’s determination regarding the merits of the appeal. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-
86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.). No pro se brief was filed. Crystal’s attorney has also
filed a motion to withdraw.
We have reviewed the record on appeal and counsel’s brief, and we agree that the appellate
points do not present a substantial question for appellate review, and are therefore frivolous. See
TEX . CIV . PRAC. & REM . CODE ANN . § 13.003(b) (Vernon 2002); see also TEX . FAM . CODE ANN .
§ 263.405(d)(3) (incorporating section 13.003(b) by reference). Accordingly, we affirm the trial
court’s judgment, and grant appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw. Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 85-86.
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
-2-