NUMBER 13-21-00145-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

 

IN THE INTEREST OF S.K.G., CHILD

 

On appeal from the 24th District Court

of Victoria County, 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. Courtappointed 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 sufficient evidence to support the 

termination findings under § 161.001(b)(1), subsections D, E, N, O, and/or best interest 
2

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 (Tex. 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 receiving 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, nonfrivolous issue 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 appellant on appeal.”); see also 
3

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 later 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 and Protective Services, may then 

file a responsive brief within twenty (20) days2 of the filing of K.D.G.’s brief, as provided 

by rule. See TEX. R. APP. P. 28.4, 38.6(b). 

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the

1st day of July, 2021.

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 termination appeals are brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the 

notice of appeal is filed. See TEX. R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2(a).