in the Interest of L.J.S., a Child v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services
This text of in the Interest of L.J.S., a Child v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (in the Interest of L.J.S., a Child 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.
Opinion
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 14, 2019.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-18-01056-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF L.J.S., A CHILD
On Appeal from the 314th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2017-05197J
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, R.J.S., appeals a final order signed November 13, 2018, terminating his parental rights to the child who is the subject of this suit.
Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The Anders procedures apply to an appeal from the termination of parental rights when an appointed attorney concludes there are no non-frivolous issues to assert on appeal. In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326, 329 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.).
On January 9, 2019, appellant was notified of the right to file a pro se response to the Anders brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d at 329–30. More than thirty days have elapsed and as of this date, no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.
Accordingly, the final order of termination is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Spain and Poissant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in the Interest of L.J.S., a Child v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-ljs-a-child-v-texas-department-of-family-and-texapp-2019.