J. S. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 14, 2025
Docket03-24-00751-CV
StatusPublished

This text of J. S. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (J. S. 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.

Bluebook
J. S. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-24-00751-CV

J. S., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE 428TH DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY NO. 22-2986, THE HONORABLE MELISSA MCCLENAHAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

The trial court terminated the parental rights of J.S. to two children. Her court-

appointed attorney has filed a brief stating that, while he found some arguable grounds for

appeal, he did not find arguable grounds to reverse the trial court’s judgment terminating

J.S.’s parental rights. The brief meets the requirement of such briefs. See Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967). In re P.M., 520 S.W.3d 24, 27 n.10 (Tex. 2016).

Upon receipt of such a brief, we independently review the brief and the record to

determine whether: (1) we agree with counsel’s conclusion that the appeal is wholly frivolous, in

which case we issue an opinion stating there is no reversible error; or (2) we conclude that

arguable grounds for appeal exist, in which case we remand the cause to the trial court. See

In re C.C., No. 04-19-00844-CV, 2020 WL 2139307, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 6, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.). If we determine that a nonfrivolous ground for appeal exists, we must

abate the appeal and remand the case to the trial court for appointment of new counsel. See id.

(citing Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no writ) (noting we

cannot order counsel to brief and argue an appeal that counsel considers frivolous)). The new

attorney then must file a brief raising nonfrivolous grounds. See id. Only after the new attorney

has briefed the issues on appeal will we address the merits of those issues. See id.

After reviewing the briefs and the record, we conclude that the appeal is not

wholly frivolous and that there are arguable grounds for appeal. Because we cannot order

counsel to brief and argue an appeal he considers frivolous, we order J.S.’s current appellate

counsel withdrawn, abate the appeal, and remand the cause to the trial court for the appointment

of new appellate counsel. See id. The trial court shall, by February 24, 2025, appoint a new

attorney on appeal to present all arguable grounds of error. The trial court shall cause a

supplemental clerk’s record to be filed containing the order appointing new counsel. This appeal

will be reinstated upon receipt of that supplemental record.

New counsel shall file a brief on the merits by March 17, 2025.

It is ordered on February 14, 2025.

Before Justices Kelly, Crump, and Ellis

Abated and Remanded

Filed: February 14, 2025

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Nichols v. State
954 S.W.2d 83 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1997)
in the Interest of P.M., a Child
520 S.W.3d 24 (Texas Supreme Court, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
J. S. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-s-v-texas-department-of-family-and-protective-services-texapp-2025.