Opinion
No. 01-03-00591-CV.
Opinion issued February 12, 2004.
On Appeal from the 315th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 2001-08856J.
Brian J. Fischer and Pamela Lervorne Verdum — Houston for Appellant.
Miriam Judith Riskind, Isenberg Riskind; Patricia Lee Flenniken, Harris County Children's Protective Services and Sandra D. Hachem, Assistant County Attorney for Appellee.
Panel consists of Chief Justice RADACK and Justices JENNINGS and HIGLEY.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an accelerated appeal from an order terminating the parental rights of appellant, Pamela Lervorne Verdun a/k/a Pamela Green, to her minor child, L.G.V. a/k/a L.G. Appellant's counsel has filed an Anders brief and has informed this Court that he has "diligently reviewed the record" and can find no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal.
See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 263.405(a) (Vernon 2002).
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967).
See In re K.D., No. 01-02-00550-CV, slip op. at 3 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] Sept. 25, 2003, no pet.) (following sister courts in holding procedures set forth in Anders are applicable to appeal from termination of parental rights when appointed counsel concludes that there are no non-frivolous issues to assert on appeal).
Background
In November 2001, the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services (TDPRS) filed a petition to terminate appellant's parental rights concerning the child. In January 2002, appellant signed an "Irrevocable Affidavit of Voluntary Relinquishment of Parental Rights" pertaining to the child.
On May 21, 2003, following a bench trial to a trial court master, the master signed an order terminating appellant's parental rights to the child based, in part, on appellant's affidavit of relinquishment. The master also based her ruling on her findings "by clear and convincing evidence" that appellant had "knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the child to remain in conditions or surroundings which endanger[ed] the physical or emotional well-being of the child" and had "engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the child with persons who engaged in conduct which endanger[ed] the physical or emotional well-being of the child." See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 263.307 (Vernon 2002). The trial court adopted the ruling of the master, subsequently denied appellant's motion for new trial, and, pursuant to section 263.405(d)(3) of the Family Code, found that appellant's appeal was frivolous. See id. § 263.405(d)(3) (Vernon 2002).
Appellant's counsel has certified to this Court that he delivered a copy of the brief to appellant by certified mail. Appellant has filed a signed "Receipt of Record," acknowledging that her counsel gave her a copy of the record on appeal and informed her that she had a right to file a pro se response. Appellant has not filed a pro se response or a motion requesting an extension of time to file a response with this Court.
Conclusion
We have reviewed the entire record, and we hold that there are no arguable grounds for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the trial court, and we grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
We note that counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and also to inform appellant that she may, on her own, pursue a petition for discretionary review of this Court's judgment in the Texas Supreme Court.
In re K.D., No. 01-02-00550-CV, slip op. at 3.