in the Interest of E.J.

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 14, 2022
• Docket: 09-22-00103-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

________________

NO. 09-22-00103-CV ________________

IN THE INTEREST OF E.J. ________________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 88th District Court Hardin County, Texas Trial Cause No. 61,653 ________________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

V.M. appeals from an order terminating her parental rights to her minor child,

E.J. The trial court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that statutory grounds

exist for termination of V.M.’s parental rights and that termination of her parental

rights would be in E.J.’s best interest. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(b)(1) (D),

(E), (O), (2).

V.M.’s appointed appellate counsel submitted a brief in which counsel

contends that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced on 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 brief provides counsel’s professional 1 evaluation of the record. Counsel served V.M. with a copy of the Anders brief filed

on her behalf. This Court notified V.M. of her right to file a pro se response, as well

as the deadline for doing so. This Court did not receive a pro se response. We have

independently reviewed the appellate record and counsel’s brief, 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). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order

terminating V.M.’s parental rights.

AFFIRMED.

________________________________ W. SCOTT GOLEMON Chief Justice

Submitted on June 27, 2022 Opinion Delivered July 14, 2022

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