in the Interest of M.D.W. and K.A.J., Children

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 19, 2019.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-18-00860-CV NO. 14-18-00861-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M.D.W., K.A.J., AND K.E.W.-J. AKA K.E.W., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 310th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 2015-67083 & 2009-66038

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, K.J. (Father), appeals final decrees signed September 11, 2018, terminating his parental rights to the children who are the subject of these suits. Appellant filed timely notices of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (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 are applicable to an appeal where termination of parental rights is sought when an appointed attorney concludes that 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 14, 2019, a copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant and appellant was notified of the right to request the record and file a pro se response. 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 twenty-five 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 appeals are 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 judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Hassan, and Poissant.