in the Interest of M.C., Jr., a Child v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 13, 2022.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-22-00340-CV

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

On Appeal from the 315th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2020-01853J

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, T.L., appeals a final decree signed April 18, 2022, terminating her parental rights to M.C., Jr.

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 July 11, 2022, 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.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jewell, Bourliot, and Zimmerer.