Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-12-00464-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF E.M.S. and M.N.R., Children
From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2011-PA-02147
Honorable Brenda Chapman, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Rebecca Simmons, Justice
Delivered and Filed: November 28, 2012
AFFIRMED
Appellant Mother A.S. and Appellant Father G.R. appeal the trial court’s order
terminating their parental rights to E.M.S. and M.N.R. Both of appellants’ court-appointed
attorneys have filed briefs containing a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating
that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. Both of appellants’ court-appointed attorneys
have, respectively, concluded that this appeal is 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.—San Antonio 2003, order) (applying Anders procedure in appeal
from termination of parental rights), disp. on merits, 2003 WL 22080522 (Tex. App.—San
Antonio 2003, no pet.). Further, Appellant Mother A.S.’s counsel states that he provided
Appellant Mother A.S. with a copy of the brief and informed her of her right to review the record
04-12-00464-CV
and file a pro se brief. Similarly, Appellant Father G.R.’s counsel states that he provided
Appellant Father G.R. with a copy of the brief and informed him of his right to review the record
and file a pro se brief. Neither Appellant Mother A.S. nor Appellant Father G.R. has filed a pro
se brief.
After reviewing the record and counsels’ briefs, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and
without merit. Therefore, the Order of Termination signed by the trial court is affirmed. We grant
counsels’ motions to withdraw. Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio
1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n. 1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no
pet.).
PER CURIAM
-2-