IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-10-00321-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF J.C.B., A CHILD
From the 74th District Court
McLennan County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2008-1454-3
MEMORANDUM OPINION
After a bench trial, the trial court terminated the parental rights of Appellant to
his son J.C.B. Appellant raises three issues in this appeal. We will affirm.
Appellant’s motion for new trial and statement of points for appeal identifies the
following points for appeal: (1-2) the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to
support the finding that Appellant knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the child to
remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered the child’s physical or emotional
well-being; (3-4) the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the finding
that Appellant knowingly engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the child with
persons who engaged in conduct that endangered the child’s physical or emotional
well-being; (5-6) the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the finding
that Appellant failed to comply with the provisions of a court order that specifically
established the actions necessary for him to obtain return of the child; and (7) the trial
court erroneously allowed hearsay and extraneous-act evidence.
In his brief, Appellant asserts the following issues: (1) the trial court abused its
discretion by denying the motion to intervene of Appellant’s father and stepmother; (2)
the trial court abused its discretion in terminating Appellant’s parental rights because
the evidence was uncontroverted that it was not in the best interest of the child to
terminate contact with his parents; and (3) the trial court abused its discretion in
terminating Appellant’s parental rights because there is no clear and convincing
evidence that termination was in the best interest of the child.
Appellant did not raise these issues in the trial court in his statement of points on
appeal. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405(i) (Vernon 2008) (“The appellate court may
not consider any issue that was not specifically presented to the trial court in a timely
filed statement of the points on which the party intends to appeal or in a statement
combined with a motion for new trial.”). Because Appellant’s three issues cannot be
raised for the first time on appeal, we dismiss them. See In re D.W., 249 S.W.3d 625, 631
(Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2008), pet. denied per curiam, 260 S.W.3d 462 (Tex. 2008); In re
E.A.R., 201 S.W.3d 813, 814 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006, no pet.).
We affirm the trial court’s order of termination.
REX D. DAVIS
Justice
In the Interest of J.C.B., a Child Page 2
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Davis, and
Justice Scoggins
Affirmed
Opinion delivered and filed July 13, 2011
[CV06]
In the Interest of J.C.B., a Child Page 3