Crystal Gale Goltl Pitts v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 31, 2010
Docket03-10-00116-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Crystal Gale Goltl Pitts v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (Crystal Gale Goltl Pitts 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.

Bluebook
Crystal Gale Goltl Pitts v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, (Tex. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-10-00116-CV

Crystal Gale Goltl Pitts, Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 340TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. C-08-0144-CPS, HONORABLE JAY K. WEATHERBY, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Crystal Gale Goltl Pitts brings this accelerated appeal from the district

court’s final decree terminating her parental rights to her minor child, J.J.G. Appellant’s

court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief, concluding that Pitts’s

appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders by

presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable

grounds for appeal. 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 parental-rights termination appeal).

Pitts was provided with copies of her counsel’s brief and motion to withdraw and

advised of her right to examine the record and to file a pro se brief. More than thirty days have

passed, and she has not filed a pro se brief or communicated with this Court in any way. Because our review of the record reveals nothing that would arguably support an appeal, we agree that the

appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 741-44; Taylor, 160 S.W.3d at

646-47. We affirm the district court’s decree of termination and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

__________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Puryear and Pemberton

Affirmed

Filed: August 31, 2010

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Taylor v. Texas Department of Protective & Regulatory Services
160 S.W.3d 641 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Crystal Gale Goltl Pitts v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crystal-gale-goltl-pitts-v-texas-department-of-family-and-protective-texapp-2010.