J

- S56031

- 18

NON

- PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

- SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

IN RE: INVOLUNTARY TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS TO B.J.V., A MINOR

APPEAL OF: J.V., MOTHER :
:

:
:

:
:

:
: IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 172 MDA 2018
Appeal from the Decree Entered September 28, 2017 i n the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County Orphans ’ Court at No(s): A63

- 184A

- 17

IN RE: INVOLUNTARY TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS TO J.M.V., A MINOR

APPEAL OF: J.V., MOTHER :

:
:

:
:

:
:

: IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 186 MDA 2018
Appeal from the Decree September 28, 2017 i n the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County Orphans ’ Court at No(s): A

- 63

- 181A

- 17J

- S56031

- 18

- 2

-

IN RE: INVOLUNTARY TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS TO A.M.V., A MINOR

APPEAL OF: J.V., MOTHER :
:

:
:

:
:

:
: IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 187 MDA 2018

Appeal from the Decree September 28, 2017 i n the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County Orphans ’ Court at No(s): A

- 63

- 182A

- 17

IN RE: INVOLUNTARY TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS TO L.A.V., A MINOR

APPEAL OF: J.V., MOTHER :

:
:

:
:

:
:

: IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 188 MDA 2018
Appeal from the Decree Entered September 28 , 2017 i n the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County Orphans ’ Court at No(s): A63

- 183A

- 17

BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., KUNSELMAN, J., and MUSMANNO, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY MUSMANNO, J. : FILED NOVEMBER 20, 2018

J. V. (“Mother”) appeals from the Decree s granting the P etitions filed by

the Schuylkill County Children and Youth Services (“CYS”)
, and involuntarily

terminat ing Mother ’ s parental rights to her sons, B.J.V. (born September

2007) and A.M.V. (born May 2016)
, and her daughters, J.M.V. (born AprilJ

- S56031

- 18

- 3

-

2010) and L.A.V. (born April 2012) (collectively “the Children”)
, pursuant to

the Adoption Act, 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511

. 1

On March 13, 2017, CYS filed P etitions to involuntarily terminate

Mother’s parental rights to the Children. On September 28, 2017, the

O rphans ’ Court entered D ecree s involuntarily terminating Mother’s parental

rights to the Children. Mother, acting pro se , filed timely appeals of the

Decrees. Mother’s counsel subsequently withdrew from representatio n

. On

March 28, 2018, the Orphans’ Court appointed substitute counsel for Mother. 2

O n April 30, 2018, counsel filed an “Advocate’s Statement” indicating that

after a thorough review of the entire record, counsel could not identify any

issues of arguable merit
, and that counsel intended to file an “Advocate’s

Brief” in this Court

. See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)(4) (providing that “i n a criminal

case, counsel may f ile of record and serve on the judge a statement of intent

to file a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967) , i n lieu

of filing a Statement.” ); s ee also In re J.T. , 983 A.2d 771, 774 (Pa. Super.

_________________ __________ ______ ____ _______

1 The parental rights of the Child ren’s father, W.M.V. (“Father”), also were terminated. Father is not a party to this appeal
, nor has Father filed his own appeal.

2 O n January 18, 2018, the Orphans’ Court permitted Mother’s prior counsel to withdraw from representation. On appeal, however, this Court remanded to the Orphans’ Court for an on

- the

- record determination of whether Mother wished to proceed pro se , or for the appointment of new cou nsel for Mother. See In re Adoption of C.A.S. , 166 A.3d 353, 356 (Pa. Super. 2017) ( recognizing that “[p] arents in involuntary termination proceedings have a constitutionally

- protected right to counsel.”).J

- S56031

- 18

- 4

-

2009) (applying Anders procedure and Pa.R .A.P. 1925(c)(4) to appeals

involving termination of parental rights).

Mother’s counsel subsequently filed an “Advocate’s Brief” in this Court

suggesting that the Orphans’ Court did not err by involuntarily terminating

Mother’s parental rights. Thus , it appears that Mother’s counsel intended to

submit a brief pursuant to Anders and its progeny. However, p ursuant to

Anders and Commonwealth v. Santiago , 978 A.2d 349 ( Pa. 2009), when

counsel determines, after a conscientious review of the record, that there are

no non

- frivolous issues for review, counsel must ( 1) petition the Court for

leave to withdraw, certifying that after a thorough review of the record,

counsel has concluded the issues to be raised are wholly frivolous; ( 2) file a

brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the

appeal; and ( 3) furnish a copy of the brief to the appellant and advise her of

her r ight to obtain new counsel or file a pro se brief to raise any additional

points the appellant deems worthy of rev iew. Santiago
, 978 A.2d at 358

- 61.

Substantial compliance with these requirements is sufficient.

Commonwealth v. Wrecks , 934 A.2d 1287, 1290 (Pa. Super. 2007).

Con sequently, we direct Mother’s counsel to file with this Court a proper

motion to withdraw . The motion to withdraw must include a copy of counsel’s

letter to Mother enclosing the brief filed by counsel, and fully advising Mother

of her rights to proceed pro se or with newly retained counsel. Counsel hasJ

- S56031

- 18

- 5

-

seven (7) days from the fili ng date of this J udgment O rde r to comply with this

directive.

Superior Court jurisdiction retained.