Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-13-00152-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF A.A., E.A., T.A., A.A., and L.A.
From the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2011-PA-01881
Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Associate Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: September 11, 2013
AFFIRMED
This is an accelerated appeal from an order terminating appellants’ parental rights.
Appellant Mother A.S. and Appellant Father T.A. filed notices of appeal from the trial court’s
order terminating their parental rights. 1 Both Appellant Mother A.S.’s court-appointed appellate
attorney and Appellant Father T.A.’s court-appointed appellate attorney have filed briefs
containing a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable
grounds to be advanced. Both counsels have concluded that this appeal is frivolous and without
merit. Both briefs meet the requirements 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.CSan Antonio 2003, order)
1
To protect the identity of the minor children, we refer to the children’s parents by their initials. See TEX. FAM. CODE
ANN. § 109.002(d) (West Supp. 2012); TEX. R. APP. P. 9.8(b)(2).
04-13-00152-CV
(applying Anders procedure in appeal from order terminating parental rights), disp. on merits, 2003
WL 22080522 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.).
Appellant Father T.A.’s counsel certified that a copy of appellant’s brief was delivered to
Appellant Father T.A. and that he was advised of his right to examine the record and to file a pro
se brief. Appellant Father T.A. did not file a pro se brief.
Appellant Mother A.S.’s counsel certified that a copy of appellant’s brief was delivered to
Appellant Mother A.S. and that she was advised of her right to examine the record and to file a
pro se brief. Appellant Mother A.S. did file a pro se brief. After reviewing the record and the briefs,
we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Therefore, the order of the trial court is
affirmed, and counsels’ motions to withdraw are granted.
PER CURIAM
-2-
in the Interest of A.A., E.A., T.A., A.A., and L.A.
Combined Opinion