Court Opinion

ID: 4941860
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-09-24 07:15:50.984472+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:14:56.062068
License: Public Domain

In The

                                 Court of Appeals

                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                                __________________

                                NO. 09-21-00145-CV
                                __________________

                    IN THE INTEREST OF S.W.
__________________________________________________________________

                On Appeal from the 279th District Court
                       Jefferson County, Texas
                      Trial Cause No. F-238,664
 _________________________________________________________________

                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

       Mother and Father appeal from an order terminating their parental rights to

their minor child, S.W. 1 The trial court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that

statutory grounds exist for termination of Mother’s and Father’s parental rights and

that termination of their parental rights would be in the best interest of S.W. See Tex.

Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(b)(1) (I), (2).

      Mother’s and Father’s appointed appellate counsel submitted separate briefs

in which counsel contends that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced on

      1
         We refer to the appellants as “Mother” and “Father” and their child by her
initials to protect their identities. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.8(b)(2).
                                             1
appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In the Interest of L.D.T., 161

S.W.3d 728, 731 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2005, no pet.). The briefs provide

counsels’ professional evaluation of the record. Counsel served Mother and Father

with a copy of the Anders brief filed on their behalf. This Court notified Mother and

Father of their right to file a pro se response, as well as the deadline for doing so.

This Court did not receive a pro se response from either parent.

      We have independently reviewed the appellate record and counsels’ briefs,

and we agree that any appeal would be frivolous. We find no arguable error requiring

us to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief this appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State,

813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s order

terminating Mother’s and Father’s parental rights.

      AFFIRMED.

                                                     _________________________
                                                        W. SCOTT GOLEMON
                                                            Chief Justice

Submitted on September 8, 2021
Opinion Delivered September 23, 2021

Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

                                          2