J. B.
v.
Tex. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs.

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTINAug 14, 2014
NO. 03-14-00316-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 14, 2014)

NO. 03-14-00316-CV

08-14-2014

J. B., Appellant v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee


FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 98TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-FM-12-006145, HONORABLE STEPHEN YELENOSKY, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

J.B. appeals from the trial court's order terminating his parental rights to his minor child, A.B. See Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001. Following a jury trial, the trial court entered judgment in accordance with the jury's findings by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds for terminating J.B.'s parental rights existed and that termination was in the child's best interest. See id. § 161.001(1)(E), (M), (O), (Q), (2).

We refer to the father and his child by their initials only. See Tex. Fam. Code § 109.002(d); Tex. R. App. P. 9.8.

On appeal, J.B.'s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Taylor v. Texas Dep't of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646-47 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied) (applying Anders procedure in appeal from termination of parental rights). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. See 386 U.S. at 744; Taylor, 160 S.W.3d at 646-47. Counsel certified to this Court that she provided J.B. with a copy of the Anders brief and motion to withdraw as counsel and informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. By order dated July 9, 2014, this Court set August 11, 2014, as the deadline for J.B. to file a pro se brief. To date, J.B. has not filed a pro se brief.

Upon receiving an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of all of the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). We have reviewed the entire record, including the Anders brief submitted on J.B.'s behalf and have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. We agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order terminating J.B.'s parental rights and grant counsel's motion to withdraw.

/s/_________


Melissa Goodwin, Justice
Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin Affirmed Filed: August 14, 2014