## NUMBER 13 - 2 1 - 00 145 - C V COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

IN THE INTEREST OF S.K.G., CHILD
On appeal from the 24 th District Court of Victoria C ounty, Texas.



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Silva Order Per Curiam This is an appeal of a judgment terminating parental rights to S.K.G., a child. Court

appointed appellate counsel for appellant K.D.G., S.K.G.’s biological father, filed a brief and a motion to withdraw stating that he has “ thoroughly reviewed the record on appeal and the factual and legal basis for the trial court[‘]s ruling. As set forth in the Brief, there

are no non - frivolous issues to be raised and the trial court’s ruling was not an abuse of judicial discretion as the State met its burden to bring su fficient evidence to support the termination findings under § 161.001(b)(1), subsections D, E, N, O, and/or best interest2

grounds .” See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Porter v. Tex. Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs. , 105 S.W.3d 52, 56 (Te x. App.

— Corpus Christi

– Edinburg 2003, no pet.) (permitting appointed counsel in a parental termination appeal to file a brief in compliance with Anders ). K.D.G.’s appellate counsel has informed this Court that he was unable to provide K.D.G. with a copy of his brief and motion to withdraw due to K.D.G. not having a mailing address in the United States. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

– 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). We did not receive a pro se response from K.D.G. Upon receivin g an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of all the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); In re S.P. , 509 S.W.3d 552, 559 (Tex. App.

— El Paso 2016, no pet.). Having reviewed the record and counsel’s Anders brief, we find that the issue of whether the evidence adduced at trial is legally or factually sufficient to support the termination of K.D.G.’s rights under § 161.001(b)(1)(D) or (b)(1)(E) is an arguable, non

frivolous iss ue precluding our immediate affirmance of the judgment under Anders

. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744 (“[I]f [an appellate court] finds any of the legal points arguable on the merits (and therefore not frivolous) it must, prior to decision, afford the indigent the assistance of counsel to argue the appeal”); In re N.G. , 577 S.W.3d 230, 239 (Tex. 2019); In re P.M. , 520 S.W.3d 24, 27

– 28 (Tex. 2016) ; Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (“[I]f the Court of Appeals does find that there are arguable grounds, the appellate court must then guarantee the appellant’s right to counsel by ensuring that another attorney is appointed to represent appella nt on appeal.”); see also3

In re N.M. , No. 07

- 16

- 00439

- CV, 2017 WL 1151934 , at *1 (Tex. App.

— Amarillo Mar. 23, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re A.W. , No. 01

- 15

- 01030

- CV, 2016 WL 3022824, at *8 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] May 26, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op. ). Accordingly, we GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw, ABATE the appeal, and REMAND the cause to the trial court for appointment of new appellate counsel for K.D.G. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; In re P.M. , 520 S.W.3d at 27

– 28 . The record of appointment, including newly

- appointed counsel’s name, email and postal addresses, telephone number, and state bar number shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court within twenty (20) days of this order . Newly

- appointed counsel shall, no l ater than twenty (20) days from his or her appointment, file with the Clerk of this Court an appellate brief on behalf of K.D.G. addressing the aforementioned issue and any other arguably meritorious issue discovered. 1 Appellee, the Department of Family a nd Protective Services, may then file a responsive brief within twenty (20) days 2 of the filing of K.D.G.’s brief, as provided by rule. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 28.4, 38.6(b).

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the 1st day of Ju ly , 202 1

.

1 We urge newly

- appointed counsel to use whatever means necessary to ensure K.D.G. receives notice of the brief filed on his behalf.

2 This expedited procedure is ordered in light of our obligation to ensure “as far as reasonably possible” that parental t ermination appeals are brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed. See T EX

. R. J UD

. A DMIN . 6.2(a).