Opinion issued August 28, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-14-00245-CV

———————————

IN THE INTEREST OF S.D., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 314th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2013-01028J

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is a parental termination case. The trial court terminated the mother’s 

parental rights to her child, S.D. The mother’s court-appointed appellate counsel 

has filed a motion to withdraw along with an Anders brief stating his professional 

opinion that the appeal is without merit and that there are no arguable grounds for 

reversal. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). The 
2

procedures set forth in Anders are applicable to an appeal of the termination of 

parental rights when an appointed attorney concludes that there are no nonfrivolous 

issues to assert on appeal. See In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d 66, 67 (Tex. App.—Houston 

[1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.). We affirm the trial court’s judgment and grant counsel’s 

motion to withdraw. 

An attorney has an ethical obligation to refuse to prosecute a frivolous 

appeal. In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). If an 

appointed attorney finds a case to be wholly frivolous, his obligation to his client is 

to seek leave to withdraw. Id. Counsel’s obligation to the appellate court is to 

assure it, through an Anders brief, that after a complete review of the record, the 

request to withdraw is well-founded. Id. Here, counsel has certified that he 

delivered a copy of the brief to the mother and informed her of her right to 

examine the appellate record and to file a response. See id. at 408.

The brief submitted by the mother’s appointed appellate counsel states his 

professional opinion that no arguable grounds for reversal exist and that any appeal 

would therefore lack merit. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400. 

Counsel’s brief meets the minimum Anders requirements by presenting a 

professional evaluation of the record and stating why there are no arguable grounds 

for reversal on appeal. See id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 
3

407–008. This Court notified the mother of her right to review the record and to 

file a pro se response. She did not file a response.

When we receive an Anders brief from an appellant’s appointed attorney 

who asserts that no arguable grounds for appeal exist, we must determine that issue 

independently by conducting our own review of the entire record. See Johnson v. 

Dep’t of Family & Protective Servs., No. 01–08–00749–CV, 2010 WL 5186806, at 

*1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 23, 2010, no pet.) (mem. op.); see In re 

K.D., 127 S.W.3d at 67; In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326, 330 (Tex. App.—Houston 

[14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.).

Thus, our role in this appeal is to determine whether arguable grounds for 

appeal exist. See Johnson, 2010 WL 5186806, at *1. If we determine that arguable 

grounds for appeal exist, we will abate the appeal and remand the case to the trial 

court to allow the appointed attorney to withdraw. See id. at *2. Then, the trial 

court will appoint another attorney to present all arguable grounds for appeal. See 

id. “‘Only after the issues have been briefed by new counsel may [we] address the 

merits of the issues raised.’” Id. (quoting Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2005)).

However, if our independent review of the record leads us to conclude that 

the appeal is wholly frivolous, we may affirm the trial court’s judgment by issuing 

an opinion in which we explain that we have reviewed the record and find no 
4

reversible error. Id. Although we may issue an opinion explaining why the appeal 

lacks arguable merit, we are not required to do so. See Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 

763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). An appellant may challenge the holding that 

there are no arguable grounds for appeal by petitioning for review in the Supreme 

Court of Texas. See Johnson, 2010 WL 5186806, at *2.

Following Anders, we have reviewed the record and counsel’s Anders brief. 

We conclude that no reversible error exists. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment 

of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.* Attorney William M. 

Thursland must immediately send the notice required by Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 6.5(c).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Massengale, Brown, and Huddle.

 * Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform the mother of the result of this 

appeal and notify her that she may, on her own, pursue a petition for review 

in the Supreme Court of Texas. See In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d 66, 68 n.3 (Tex. 

App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.).