Court Opinion

ID: 9388959
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-23 07:15:28.503768+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:24.140283
License: Public Domain

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 18, 2023.

                                 In The

                 Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                          NO. 14-22-00862-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF W.Y.G.M. A/K/A W.G.G. AND J.N.G.-A. A/K/A J.A,
                         CHILDREN

                 On Appeal from the 308th District Court
                         Harris County, Texas
                   Trial Court Cause No. 2020-79963

                                AND

                          NO. 14-22-00885-CV

   IN THE INTEREST OF J.D.G.G. A/K/A J.D.G. AND M.E.G.G. A/K/A
                      M.E.G., CHILDREN

                 On Appeal from the 308th District Court
                         Harris County, Texas
                   Trial Court Cause No. 2018-18930
                   MEMORANDUM OPINION

       Appellant, M.Y.G.M., appeals a final order of termination signed November
10, 2022, terminating her parental rights to the four children who are the subject of
these suits.

       Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the
appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a
professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable
grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-13 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1978). The Anders procedures apply to an appeal from the termination of
parental rights when an appointed attorney concludes there are no non-frivolous
issues to assert on appeal. In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326, 329 (Tex. App.—
Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.).

       On January 4, 2023, appellant was notified of the right to file a pro se
response to the Anders brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1991); In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d at 329-30. More than thirty days have
elapsed and, as of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

       We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the
appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error
in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of
the state.

       Accordingly, the trial court’s final order is affirmed.

                                     PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Jewell and Spain.

                                           2