Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-21-00045-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF S.M.W. and S.-L.W., Children
From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2020PA00394
Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Beth Watkins, Justice
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Beth Watkins, Justice
Delivered and Filed: July 21, 2021
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW DENIED
Appellant S.R. appeals the trial court’s order terminating her parental rights to her children
S.M.W. and S.-L.W. Her court-appointed appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw and a brief
containing a professional evaluation of the record, concluding there are no arguable grounds for
reversal of the termination order. The brief satisfies the requirements of Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967). See In re P.M., 520 S.W.3d 24, 27 n.10 (Tex. 2016) (per curiam) (recognizing
that Anders procedures apply in parental termination cases). Additionally, counsel represents that
she provided S.R. with a copy of the brief and the motion to withdraw, advised S.R. of her right to
review the record and file her own brief, and informed S.R. how to obtain a copy of the record,
providing her with a form motion for access to the appellate record. We issued an order setting a
04-21-00045-CV
deadline for S.R. to file a pro se brief. However, S.R. did not request the appellate record or file a
pro se brief.
After reviewing the appellate record and appointed counsel’s brief, we conclude no
plausible grounds exist for reversal of the termination order. Accordingly, we affirm the trial
court’s termination order. We deny counsel’s motion to withdraw because it does not show good
cause for withdrawal. See id. at 27 & n.7 (holding that counsel’s obligations in a parental
termination case extend through exhaustion or waiver of all appeals and that withdrawal should be
permitted by a court of appeals “only for good cause” (citing TEX. R. CIV. P. 10)).
Beth Watkins, Justice
-2-