A. A. P. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services
This text of A. A. P. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (A. A. P. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-14-00356-CV
A. A. P., Appellant
v.
Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 340TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. C-12-0105-CPS, HONORABLE JAY K. WEATHERBY, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant A.A.P. appeals from the trial court’s order terminating her rights to her
three young daughters, B.J.A., N.J.A., and L.J.A. See Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(1)(D), (E), (O),
(P), (2).1 A.A.P.’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief,
concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738,
744 (1967); see also Taylor v. Texas Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641,
646–47 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied) (applying Anders procedure in appeal from
termination of parental rights). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a
professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be
advanced. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Taylor, 160 S.W.3d at 646–47. A.A.P. was provided with
1 Although the termination order also severed the parental rights of the children’s father, he is not a party to this appeal. a copy of counsel’s brief, was advised of her right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro
se brief, and granted an extension of time to file her brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
The parties are familiar with the facts, procedural history, and applicable standards
of review. Accordingly, we will not recite them here. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. We have reviewed
the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find
nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80
(1988); Anders, 386 U.S. at 741–44; Taylor, 160 S.W.3d at 646–47. We affirm the trial court’s
order of termination and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw as attorney of record.
_____________________________________________
J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin
Affirmed
Filed: August 19, 2014
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
A. A. P. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-a-p-v-texas-department-of-family-and-protective-services-texapp-2014.