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NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37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

in 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

in the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County

Orphans’ Court at No(s): A-63-181A-17
J-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

in 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

in 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 Decrees granting the Petitions filed by 

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

terminating 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 April 
J-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 Petitions to involuntarily terminate 

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

Orphans’ Court entered Decrees 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 representation. On 

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

On 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 “in a criminal 

case, counsel may file 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), in lieu 

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

____________________________________________

1 The parental rights of the Children’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 On 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 counsel 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, pursuant 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 right to obtain new counsel or file a pro se brief to raise any additional 

points the appellant deems worthy of review. 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).

Consequently, 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 has 
J-S56031-18

- 5 -

seven (7) days from the filing date of this Judgment Order to comply with this 

directive.

Superior Court jurisdiction retained.