in the Interest of E.D., Children

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 28, 2009
Docket04-07-00768-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in the Interest of E.D., Children (in the Interest of E.D., Children) 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
in the Interest of E.D., Children, (Tex. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-07-00768-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF E.D., et al., Children

From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2006-PA-00954 Honorable Janet P. Littlejohn, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 28, 2009

AFFIRMED

This is an appeal concerning the trial court’s termination of Appellants Terrick, Lashonda

and Alexander’s parental rights to children E.D., T.A. and A.W. 1 Terrick, Lashonda and

Alexander’s court-appointed appellate attorneys each filed a brief containing a professional

evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced

regarding their respective clients. Each counsel concluded that the appeal is without merit

regarding their client. The briefs meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

1 To protect the privacy of the parties in this case, we identify the children by their initials and the children’s mother, presumed father and alleged father by their first names only. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 109.002(d) (Vernon 2002). 04-07-00768-CV

(1967). See In re R.R., No. 04-03-00096-CV, 2003 WL 21157944, at *4 (Tex. App.—San

Antonio May 21, 2003, no pet.) (applying Anders procedure in appeal from termination of

parental rights).

Each appellate counsel provided their respective clients with a copy of their appellate

brief, and advised their clients of his or her right to examine the record and to file a pro se brief.

No pro se brief has been filed. After reviewing the record, we agree that the appeals are

frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is, therefore, affirmed. Furthermore,

we grant counsels’ motions to withdraw.

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

-2-

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in the Interest of E.D., Children, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-ed-children-texapp-2009.