Court Opinion

ID: 9811903
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 22:32:31.846118+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:22:30.443388
License: Public Domain

KEM THOMPSON FROST, Justice,
concurring.
Applying the standards of review recently announced by the Texas Supreme Court, the record contains legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s findings that appellant engaged in conduct that endangered U.P.’s physical or emotional well-being and that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in U.P.’s best interest. See Tex. Fam. Code. § 161.001; In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 264-67 (Tex.2002); In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17, 25-26 (Tex.2002); Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367, 371-72 (Tex.1976) (promulgating a nonexclusive list of factors that may be considered when determining the best interest of the child). Appellant did not preserve error as to his fifth and sixth points by asserting these complaints and obtaining a ruling in the trial court. See Tex.R.App. P. 33.1(a). Though I do not join in the majority’s analysis, I concur in the court’s judgment.