in the Interest of C. M. S, a Child

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 17, 2019
• Docket: 04-18-00872-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas January 17, 2019

No. 04-18-00872-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF C. M. S, A CHILD,

From the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2015-PA-01181 Honorable Richard Garcia, Judge Presiding

ORDER This is an accelerated appeal from the trial court’s final order terminating appellant’s parental rights. On January 3, 2019, appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a brief and motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there is no meritorious issue to raise on appeal. After reviewing the brief, we find the brief is insufficient in light of our recent decision in In re N.F.M., No. 04-18-00475-CV, 2018 WL 6624409 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Dec. 19, 2018, no pet. h.).

Accordingly, we ORDER appointed counsel’s Anders brief stricken and that the brief be redrawn.1 We ORDER the redrawn brief to be filed in this court on or before February 6, 2019. We further ORDER appointed counsel to notify appellant that the Anders brief has been stricken, that there is no current deadline for filing a pro se brief, and to provide this court with proof that he has notified appellant as ordered.

We order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on the trial court and all counsel.

_________________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice

1 We advise counsel to pay particular attention to the necessary components of an Anders brief as set out in our decision in N.F.M. See 2018 WL 6624409, *3-*4. Appointed counsel is instructed that pursuant to our decision in N.F.M., conclusory statements that the appeal is frivolous are inadequate; rather, appointed counsel must explain why and how he reached his conclusion that the appeal is frivolous. See Earle v. Ratliff, 998 S.W.2d 882, 890 (Tex. 1999) (holding statement is conclusory if basis for statement is unexplained); CA Partners v. Spears, 274 S.W.3d 51, 63 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, pet. denied) (holding that conclusory statement is one that does not provide underlying facts to support conclusion). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 17th day of January, 2019.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE, Clerk of Court