AFFIRMED and Opinion Filed December 13, 2013 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-13-01147-CV
In the Interest of R.S.P., et al, Children On Appeal from the 305th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 12-753-X 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Moseley, Bridges, and Lang-Miers Opinion by Justice Bridges Appellant Lorrine Patterson app eals the trial court’s final order terminating her parental rights to her minor children, R.S.P. and A.S.P. Appellant’s appointed c ounsel has filed a motion to withdraw, along with an Anders brief, asserting the appeal is without merit and there are no arguable grounds for reversal. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We affirm the trial court’s judgment and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. The procedures set forth in Anders are applicable to an appeal from a trial court’s order terminating parental rights when, as here, appe llant’s appointed counsel concludes there are no non-frivolous issues to assert on appeal. See In re D.D., 279 S.W.3d 849, 849-50 (Tex. App.— Dallas 2009, pet. denied); In re D.E.S. , 135 S.W.3d 326, 329 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.); In re K.D. , 127 S.W.3d 66, 67 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.). A court of appeals is not required to addre ss the merits of claims raised in an Anders brief or a pro–2– se response. See In re D.D. , 279 S.W.3d at 850 (citing Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)). Rather, this Court’s duty is to determine whether there are any arguable grounds and, if so, to remand the case to the trial court so new counsel may be appointed to address the issues. See id. Counsel for appellant has filed an Anders brief in which she concludes that, after a thorough review of the record, appe llant’s appeal of the termina tion of her parental rights is frivolous and without merit. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; In re D.E.S. , 135 S.W.3d at 327, 330;
In re K.D. , 127 S.W.3d at 67. Counsel ha s certified that she deliver ed a copy of the brief to appellant and has informed appellant of her right to examine the appellate record and to file a
response. See In re D.D. , 279 S.W.3d at 850. Appellant filed a pro se response. We have independently reviewed the entire record, counsel’s Anders brief, and the pro se response. We agree with counsel’s assessment th at the appeal is frivol ous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that could arguably support the appe al. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s final order terminating appellan t’s parental rights to he r two children and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See In re D.D. , 279 S.W.3d at 850.

131147F.P05 /David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

IN RE: IN THE INTEREST OF: R.S.P., ET AL, CHILDREN
No. 05-13-01147-CV On Appeal from the 305th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 12-753-X. Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. Justices Moseley and Lang-Miers participating. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

. It is ORDERED that the parties bear their own costs of appeal.
Judgment entered December 13, 2013

/David L. Bridges DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE