Opinion
NO. 09-11-00725-CV
05-24-2012
IN THE INTEREST OF D.M.H.
On Appeal from the County Court at Law
Polk County, Texas
Trial Cause No. PC05038
MEMORANDUM OPINION
T.A.K. appeals from an order terminating his parental rights to the minor child D.M.H. A jury found, by clear and convincing evidence, that statutory grounds existed for the termination and that termination of T.A.K.'s parental rights would be in the best interest of the child. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(1)(D), (E), (O), (2) (West Supp. 2011).
T.A.K.'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 appellant with a copy of the Anders brief, moved to withdraw, and requested that T.A.K. be provided with an opportunity to file a pro se response. On March 1, 2012, we granted a forty-day extension of time for filing a pro se brief. The appellant has not filed a pro se brief
We have reviewed counsel's brief and independently reviewed the trial court record. We agree 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 T.A.K. of the result of this appeal and that he has a 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.
CHARLES KREGER
Justice
Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.