in the Interest of J.M.M. and J.L.M., Children

Motion Granted; Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 17, 2014. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-14-00246-CV IN THE INTEREST OF J.M.M. AND J.L.M., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 315th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2006-10028J MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, S.J., appeals a decree signed March 7, 2014, terminating his parental rights to his child, J.L.S. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), 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 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The Anders procedures are applicable to an appeal from the termination of parental rights when an appointed attorney concludes there are no non-frivolous issues to assert on appeal. In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326, 329 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d at 329–30. This court provided appellant with a copy of the record and advised him that any response to counsel’s Anders brief was required to be filed in this court on or before June 3, 2014. No response was filed. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices McCally and Donovan. 2