Opinion
NO. 09-12-00016-CV
09-06-2012
IN THE INTEREST OF C.N.S. AND T.G.S.
On Appeal from the 75th District Court
Liberty County, Texas
Trial Cause No. CV1003318
MEMORANDUM OPINION
J.L.S. appeals from an order terminating his parental rights to his minor children, C.N.S. and T.G.S. The trial court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that statutory grounds existed for the termination and that termination of J.L.S.'s parental rights would be in the best interest of the children. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(1)(D), (E), (O), (2) (West Supp. 2012).
J.L.S.'s court-appointed appellate counsel submitted a brief in which counsel concludes that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); In the Interest of L.D.T., 161 S.W.3d 728, 731 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2005, no pet.). The brief provides counsel's professional evaluation of the record. Counsel served J.L.S. with a copy of the Anders brief, moved to withdraw, and requested that J.L.S. be provided with an opportunity to file a pro se response. On May 24, 2012, we granted a forty-day extension of time for filing a pro se response. J.L.S. has not filed a pro se brief.
We have reviewed counsel's brief and the trial court record. We conclude that no arguable grounds for appeal exist, and we therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. We grant appellate counsel's motion to withdraw.
In connection with withdrawing from the case, counsel shall inform J.L.S. of the result of this appeal and that he has the right to file a petition for review with the Texas Supreme Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 53; In the Interest of K.D., 127 S.W.3d 66, 68 n.3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.).
AFFIRMED.
________
HOLLIS HORTON
Justice
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.