## NO. 12-08-00456-CV IN THE COUR T OF APP EALS TWELFTH COURT OF APP EALS D ISTRICT

TYLER, TEX AS

IN THE INTERE

ST OF § APPEAL F ROM THE 392ND M.T. AND M.T., § JUDICIAL DISTRI CT COURT OF MIN OR CHI LD REN § HEN DE RSO N C OU NTY, TE XAS

MEMORA NDUM OPIN ION R.T. appea ls the trial court’s fi n al o rder in a conse rvatorship a

nd termination proce eding broug ht by

the Texas Depa

rtment of F amily

an d Protective Servic es (DF PS). I n two issues, R.T. contends that the tria l court er red by denying his motion for continuance and that the evidenc e wa s in s u f f ic ie n t t o s u

p p o rt t h e te r mi n a ti o no f

h is p ar e n t- c h il d

r e lati o n s h ip w it

h h is tw o d a

u g h te r s . We a ff ir m.

A PP ELLATE R EV IEW O F S UB CHAP T E R E F I N A L O RDE RS Sub c ha pte r E of

Chap te r 2 63 of

the Te xas F a mil y

Cod e g ov e rn s f

ina l or de rs in conser vatorship and termination proce eding s in case s involving childre n under D FPS car e. See In re A.J .K. , 116 S.W .3d 165, 169–70 (Tex. A pp.–Houston [14t h Dist.] 2003, no pet.). DF PS brought su it s e e kin g c on se rv a tor sh ip o f R .T .’ s tw o da ug hte rs and

te rm inatio n o f h is p are nt- c hil d r e la tio ns hip with them. The appeale d final order t erminate d R.T.’s pare nt-child relationship with his daug hters and appointed D FPS as their per manent mana g ing cons ervator. Ther efor e, this final orde r wa s g overne d by subchapte r E. See In r eK.C .B. , 251 S.W .3d 514, 515 (Tex. 2008) (per curiam) (“A s a pre requisite to appellate re view, the Te x as F amily Code requir es a pa

rty whose pa renta l rig hts have been te rminated to timely file with the trial cour

t a statement of points on which the party intends to appea l.”).B eca us e i t i s un nec es s ar y t o do ot her wi s e, we hav e c i t ed t o t he mo s t cu r r ent ve r s i on of t hi s s t at ut e. 1 2 The Te x as F amily Code require s an appellant se eking revie w of a subchapte r E fina l order to file with the trial cour

t, no later than f

ifteen da y s afte r t h e fi n al o rd er is si g ned, a statement of points on which the appe llant intends to appeal. T EX . F AM . C ODE A NN . § 263.405(b) ( Ver non 20 09 ). Th e state me nt m ay be fi le d s e pa

rate ly or may be c omb ine d w itha

mo tion f or ne w tri a l. 1 T EX . F AM . C ODE ANN . § 263.405(b–1) ( Ver non 2009). An ap p el l ate court may not consider a

ny issue that was not spec ifically prese nted to the trial cour t in a timely

filed statement of points. T EX . F AM . C OD E A NN . § 26 3. 40 5( i) (V e rn on 20 09 ); In r eK.C

.B. , 251 S.W .3d at 515 n.1. While a statement of points may

be combined w ith a motion for new t rial, a motion for ne w trial that does not include such a

statement of points is not sufficie nt to allow appellate review of a subcha pter E final orde r. See T EX . F AM . C ODE ANN . § 263.405(i). The fina l order in this ca se wa s signe d on October 21, 2008. The re cord c ontains no evidenc e that R.T. filed a stateme nt of points separately or in a motion for ne w trial. Acc ording ly , we c annot consider the issues R.T. has raised on a ppeal. See id. ; In r eK.C

.B. , 251 S.W .3d at 515.

D I S P OS I T I ON We cannot conside r t h e issues R.T. has ra ised on appe al. Ther efor e, we a f f ir m the trial court’s or der.



### BRIAN HO Y LE J ustice

Opinion delivere d Marc h 31, 2009. Pane l co ns i s t ed of

Wor t hen , C. J. , Gri

f f i t h, J. , an d Hoyl e, J.

(PUBL I SH)