From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

A. N. v. Tex. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs.

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Feb 16, 2018
NO. 03-17-00629-CV (Tex. App. Feb. 16, 2018)

Opinion

NO. 03-17-00629-CV

02-16-2018

A. N., Appellant v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee


FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 98TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-FM-16-004462 , HONORABLE DARLENE BYRNE, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION

A.N. appeals from the district court's decree terminating her parental rights to her daughters, K.N. and N.N. When terminating A.N.'s parental rights, the district court determined that A.N. had failed to comply with the requirements of a court order establishing the actions necessary for her to obtain the return of her children and that termination was in the children's best interest. See Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b)(1)(O), (2). On appeal, A.N.'s attorney has filed a brief stating that after reviewing the record, she believes that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has presented a professional evaluation of the record and explained why she believes there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Counsel has represented to the Court that she provided a copy of the brief to A.N., advised A.N. of her right to file a pro se brief, provided A.N. with a copy of the clerk's record, and notified A.N. of the deadline for filing a pro se brief. See Taylor v. Texas Dep't of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646-47 & n.4 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (setting out requirements in criminal context). A.N. has not filed a pro se brief or made contact with this Court. We have conducted our own review of the record and agree that the appeal is frivolous. We therefore affirm the trial court's final decree. Further, in accordance with instructions provided by the Texas Supreme Court, we deny counsel's motion to withdraw. See In re P.M., 520 S.W.3d 24, 27 (Tex. 2016).

This and other Texas courts have held that it is appropriate in a parental termination case to file a brief asserting that the appeal is frivolous. See Taylor v. Texas Dep't of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646 & n.4 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied); In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326, 329 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.); In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d 66, 67 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.).

The Texas Supreme Court has held that the right to counsel in suits seeking the termination of parental rights extends to "all proceedings in [the Texas Supreme Court], including the filing of a petition for review." In re P.M., 520 S.W.3d 24, 27 (Tex. 2016). Accordingly, counsel's obligation to A.N. has not yet been discharged. See id. If A.N., after consulting with counsel, desires to file a petition for review, counsel should timely file with the Texas Supreme Court "a petition for review that satisfies the standards for an Anders brief." See id. at 27-28.

/s/_________

David Puryear, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Field, and Bourland Affirmed Filed: February 16, 2018


Summaries of

A. N. v. Tex. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs.

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Feb 16, 2018
NO. 03-17-00629-CV (Tex. App. Feb. 16, 2018)
Case details for

A. N. v. Tex. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs.

Case Details

Full title:A. N., Appellant v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services…

Court:TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Date published: Feb 16, 2018

Citations

NO. 03-17-00629-CV (Tex. App. Feb. 16, 2018)