in the Interest of O.K. IV, a Child ( 2014 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-14-00659-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF O.K. IV, a Child
From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2014-PA-00140
Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding 1
Opinion by: Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: December 17, 2014
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED
Appellant mother appeals the trial court’s judgment terminating her parental rights to her
child O.K. IV. The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (“the Department”)
moved to have appellant’s parental rights terminated on a variety of grounds. See TEX. FAM. CODE
ANN. §§ 161.001(1)(A)-(G), (I), (K), and (M)-(R), 161.003 (West 2014). After a bench trial, the
trial court found appellant’s parental rights should be terminated because mother violated sections
(B), (C), (M), (N), and (R) of section 161.001(1) of the Texas Family Code. See TEX. FAM. CODE
ANN. § 161.001(1)(B), (C), (M), (N), and (R) (West 2014). The trial court further determined
1
The Honorable Gloria Saldaña is the presiding judge of the 438th Judicial District Court Bexar County, Texas. The
order of termination in this matter was signed by the Honorable Charles Montemayor, Associate Judge.
04-14-00659-CV
termination would be in the best interests of the child pursuant to section 161.001(2). Id.
§ 161.001(2).
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 obtain a copy of the appellate record and 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. Appointed counsel provided appellant with a form which she could sign, date,
and file with this court in order to obtain a copy of the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313,
319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Appellant filed neither a request for the record nor 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. Accordingly, we hold
the trial court did not err in terminating appellant’s parental rights. We grant the motion to
withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
-2-