in the Interest of T.T.A. AKA T.T.A D.T.S.A., Jr. AKA D.T.S.A D.M.D.A AKA D.D.A ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 25, 2014.
    In The
    Fourteenth Court of Appeals
    NO. 14-13-00951-CV
    IN THE INTEREST OF T.T.A. AKA T.T.A.; D.T.S.A., JR. AKA D.T.S.A.;
    D.M.D.A. AKA D.D.A., CHILDREN
    On Appeal from the 315th District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 2010-01847J
    MEMORANDUM                      OPINION
    Appellant, D.T.S. aka D.T.S. aka D.Unknown, appeals a final decree signed
    October 2, 2013, terminating his parental rights to the children who are the subject
    of this suit. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. The trial court found that
    appellant is indigent and appointed counsel to represent him in this appeal.
    Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal
    is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders
    v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 
    87 S. Ct. 1396
    (1967), presenting a professional
    evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be
    advanced. See High v. State, 
    573 S.W.2d 807
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The
    Anders procedures are applicable to an appeal from the termination of parental
    rights when an appointed attorney concludes that there are no non-frivolous issues
    to assert on appeal. In re D.E.S., 
    135 S.W.3d 326
    , 329 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th
    Dist.] 2004, no pet.).
    A copy of counsel’s brief and the record on appeal were delivered to
    appellant. Appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and
    file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 
    813 S.W.2d 503
    , 510 (Tex. Crim. App.
    1991); In re 
    D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d at 329-30
    . As of this date, no pro se response has
    been filed.
    We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the
    appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error
    in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of
    the state.
    Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices McCally, Busby and Donovan.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-13-00951-CV

Filed Date: 2/25/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/22/2015