TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-15-00624
C. D. C., Appellant
v.
Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 98TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-FM-14-005141, HONORABLE ORLINDA NARANJO, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant C.D.C. appeals from the trial court’s decree of termination of her parental
rights to her child, J.M.W. At the time of the trial, J.M.W. was twelve years old. The court heard
testimony that C.D.C. has bipolar disorder and that she had been unable to consistently remain on
her prescribed medication; that J.M.W. had been subjected to physical violence by C.D.C.; that
J.M.W. had made outcries to several people that her grandfather, who resided in the home, was
inappropriately touching her; and that her grandfather used crack cocaine in her presence.
At the close of the testimony, the court found by clear and convincing evidence
that C.D.C. knowingly placed or allowed J.M.W. to remain in conditions or surroundings which
endangered her physical or emotional well-being; that C.D.C. engaged in conduct or knowingly
placed J.M.W. with persons who engaged in conduct which endangered her physical or emotional
well-being; and that it was in the best interest of J.M.W. to terminate the parent-child relationship.
See Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b)(1)(D), (E), (2).
On appeal, C.D.C.’s appellate attorney has filed a brief stating that after reviewing
the record, she believes that the appeal is frivolous.1 Counsel has presented a professional evaluation
of the record and explained why she believes there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Counsel
has represented to the Court that she provided a copy of the brief to C.D.C.; advised her of her
right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief; provided her with the mailing address
of the Travis County District Clerk; and notified her of her deadline for filing a pro se brief.
See Taylor v. Texas Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Svcs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646-47 & n.4 (Tex.
App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App.
2014). C.D.C. has not filed a pro se brief with this Court. We have conducted our own review of
the record and we agree that the appeal is frivolous. We therefore affirm the trial court’s decree of
termination. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw as attorney of record.
__________________________________________
David Puryear, Justice
Before Justices Puryear, Goodwin and Bourland
Affirmed
Filed: January 21, 2016
1
This and other Texas courts have held that it is appropriate in a parental termination case
to file a brief asserting that the appeal is frivolous. See Taylor v. Texas Dep’t of Protective &
Regulatory Svcs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646 & n.4 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied); In re D.E.S.,
135 S.W.3d 326, 329 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.); In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d 66,
67 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.).
2
C. D. C. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services
Combined Opinion