COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-14-00152-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF C.R., I.P.,
AND Z.P., CHILDREN
----------
FROM THE 367TH DISTRICT COURT OF DENTON COUNTY
TRIAL COURT NO. 2012-50930-367
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
Appellant Mother appeals the trial court’s final order terminating her
parental rights to her three children, C.R., I.P., and Z.P. See Tex. Fam. Code
Ann. § 161.001(1)(D), (E), (O) (West 2014). Mother’s court-appointed appellate
counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that
motion. In the motion, counsel avers that he has conducted a professional
evaluation of the record and, after a thorough review of the applicable law, has
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
reached the conclusion that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced to
support an appeal of this cause and that the appeal is frivolous. Neither Mother
nor the State filed a response.
Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California
by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there
are no reversible grounds on appeal and referencing any grounds that might
arguably support the appeal. 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967);
see In re K.M., 98 S.W.3d 774, 776‒77 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2003, no pet.)
(holding that Anders procedures apply in parental termination cases).
In our duties as the reviewing court, we must conduct an independent
evaluation of the record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining
that the appeal is frivolous. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1991). Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82‒83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the appellate record and appellate counsel’s
brief. We agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without
merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also In re
A.B., No. 13-0749, 2014 WL 1998440, at *6 (Tex. May 16, 2014) (holding that an
appellate court that affirms a judgment terminating parental rights need not detail
the evidence when performing a factual sufficiency review). Therefore, we grant
2
appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s final order
terminating Mother’s parental rights to C.R., I.P., and Z.P.
/s/ Bill Meier
BILL MEIER
JUSTICE
PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and MEIER, JJ.
DELIVERED: September 18, 2014
3
in the Interest of C.R., I.P., and Z.P., Children
Combined Opinion