1 In The
Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ NO. 09

- 23

- 00141

- CV

__________________ IN THE INTEREST OF A.C.

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 317th District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. C- 241,267

__________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION

Following a trial to the bench, the trial court terminated Mother’s

relationship with A.C. , whom we will call Anna , their eighteen

- month

old child. 1 After the trial court signed the order terminating Anna’s

relationship with her Mother , Mother filed her notice of appeal. 2

1 We have us ed pseudonym s to protect the identity of the minor. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.8(a), (b). The trial court signed an interlocutory order that terminated Father’s parent

- child relationship with Anna three months before the trial to the bench when Father failed to appear after being “ duly and properly notified” by the Department of Family and P rotec tive Services of the suit.

2 While Father didn’t appeal from the interlocutory order the trial court signed when it terminat ed his parental rights to Anna based on his2 As to Mother, in its final order states the trial found by clear and

convincing evidence “ that Mother has knowingly placed or allowed

[Anna] to remain in conditions that endangered her well

- being and

engaged in conduct or knowingly placed [ Anna ] with person s who

engaged in conduct which endanger [ ed Anna’s ] physical or emotional

well

- being [

. ]” 3 The trial court also found that terminating the parent

child relationship between Mother and Anna is in Anna’s best interes t. 4
On appeal, Mother’s court

- appointed attorney filed a brief . The
brief provides the Court with a professional evaluation of the record.

According to Mother’s brief, no arguable grounds exist to support

Mother ’ s appeal. 5 Mother’s attorney also provided the Court with a letter

that she represents she sent to Mother upon filing the brief. The

attorney’s letter says that the attorney provided Mother with a copy of

fail ure t o appear in response to the Department’s suit , we note the order the trial court signed terminating Mother’s rights in May 2023 contains language of finality . Thus, Father had the right to appeal from the trial court’s May 2023 order terminating Mother’s rights, as it denies all relief “not expressly granted[.]”

3 See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(b)(1)(D), (E).

4 Id . § 161.001(b)(2)

. 5 See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In the Interest of L.D.T. , 161 S.W.3d 728, 731 (Tex. App.

— Beaumont 2005, no pet.).3 the letter, the brief, the Reporter’s Record, and the Clerk’s Record that
were filed in her appeal.

After receiving the Anders brief, the Clerk of the Ninth Court of

Appeals notified Mother she had until September 21, 2023 , to file a pro

se response with the court. Yet the appellate record shows that Mother
did not file a response after the Court sent her th is notice.

We have ind ependently reviewed the appellate record

. Based on
that review, we find Mother’s appeal is frivolous

. Accordingly, we need

not appoint another attorney to re

- brief the appeal. 6
Accordingly, the trial court’s final order is

AFFIRMED.

HOLLIS HORTON Justice

Submitted on October 12, 2023 Opinion Delivered October 19, 2023
Before Horton, Johnson and Wright, JJ.

6 Cf. Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).