From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re M.D.

Court of Appeals of Texas
May 9, 2012
No. 04-11-00904-CV (Tex. App. May. 9, 2012)

Opinion

No. 04-11-00904-CV

05-09-2012

In the INTEREST OF M.D., A.D., A.D., R.D., M.D., Children


MEMORANDUM OPINION


From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011-PA-00352

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Associate Judge Presiding

The Honorable Richard Price is the presiding judge of the 285th Judicial District Court. However, the order of termination was signed by the Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Associate Judge.

Opinion by: Marialyn Barnard, Justice Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

Appellant mother, N.D., appeals the trial court's judgment terminating her parental rights to M.D., A.D., A.D., R.D., and M.D. Appellant's court-appointed appellate attorney has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating there are no arguable grounds to be advanced and concluding the appeal is frivolous. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See In re R.R., No. 04-03-00096-CV, 2003 WL 21157944, *4 (Tex. App.—San Antonio May 21, 2003, order) (applying Anders procedure to appeals from orders terminating parental rights), disp. on merits, 2003 WL 22080522 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 10, 2003, no pet.) (mem. op.). Appellant was provided a copy of the brief and informed of her right to file her own brief. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio July 23, 1997, no pet.); In re R.R., 2003 WL 21157944, at *4. Appellant did not file a pro se brief.

We have reviewed the record and the attorney's brief and we agree with counsel that the appellate points do not present a substantial question for appellate review. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 13.003(b) (West 2002); TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405(d)(3) (incorporating section 13.003(b) by reference). Accordingly, we hold the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the points of appeal to be frivolous. We grant the motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgment.

Marialyn Barnard, Justice


Summaries of

In re M.D.

Court of Appeals of Texas
May 9, 2012
No. 04-11-00904-CV (Tex. App. May. 9, 2012)
Case details for

In re M.D.

Case Details

Full title:In the INTEREST OF M.D., A.D., A.D., R.D., M.D., Children

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas

Date published: May 9, 2012

Citations

No. 04-11-00904-CV (Tex. App. May. 9, 2012)