In the Interest of H.M. v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 1, 2023
• Docket: 09-22-00426-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-22-00426-CV __________________

IN THE INTEREST OF H.M.

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 317th District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. C-240,693 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Father appeals an order terminating his parent-child relationship

with his one-year-old daughter, H.M. (Hailey). 1 Father’s parental rights

were terminated after the trial court found by clear and convincing

evidence in a trial before the bench that he:

1To protect the identities of Father and H.M., we use pseudonyms in the opinion in place of names. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.8(a), (b). The trial court’s findings of facts show that Hailey’s mother is deceased. 1 (1) knowingly placed or knowingly allowed Hailey to remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered her physical or emotional well-being;

(2) engaged in conduct or knowingly placed Hailey with persons who engaged in conduct that endangered her physical or emotional well-being;

(3) constructively abandoned Hailey, who had been in the permanent or temporary managing conservatorship of the Department of Family and Protective Services for not less than six months; and

(4) failed to comply with the provisions of a court order establishing the actions Father was required to follow for Hailey to be returned after she was placed in Department care for not less than nine months after being removed from her home for abuse or neglect. 2

In addition to the above findings, the trial court found by clear and

convincing evidence that terminating Father’s parent-child relationship

with Hailey is in Hailey’s best interest.

After Father perfected his appeal, his court-appointed attorney

filed a brief. The brief the attorney filed provides the attorney’s

professional evaluation of the record and asserts that no arguable

2See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(b)(1)(D), (E), (N), (O). 2 grounds exist to support Father’s appeal. 3 The attorney certified that she

sent Father a copy of the brief she filed in his appeal.

After Father’s brief was filed with the Court, the Clerk of the Ninth

Court of Appeals notified Father that he had until March 6, 2023, to file

a pro se response. But the appellate record demonstrates Father did not

file a response.

We have independently reviewed the record. Based on our review,

we find Father’s appeal to be frivolous. Accordingly, we need not appoint

another attorney to re-brief the appeal. 4

For the above reasons, the trial court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED.

_________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice

Submitted on April 3, 2023 Opinion Delivered June 1, 2023

Before Horton, Johnson and Wright, JJ.

3See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In the Int. of L.D.T., 161 S.W.3d 728, 731 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2005, no pet.). 4Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).