in the Interest of M.G., D.G., S.G., E.G., R.M., Children ( 2009 )

NO. 07-09-0137-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL A
NOVEMBER 9, 2009
______________________________
IN THE INTEREST OF M.G., D.G., S.G., E.G., AND R.M., CHILDREN
_________________________________
FROM THE 72ND DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;
NO. 2008-542,603; HONORABLE KEVIN C. HART, ASSOCIATE JUDGE
_______________________________
Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.
CONCURRING OPINION
I join in the Court’s opinion, and write simply to add that, were we to find that the
merits of this father’s appellate contentions were preserved for our review, I still would
affirm the trial court’s judgment. I cannot agree with appellant’s contention the evidence
that termination of his parental rights is in the best interest of his children is insufficient,
legally or factually. The children ranged in ages from four to thirteen at the time of trial.
Their mother’s parental rights have been terminated. Their father is incarcerated and may
remain so until 2016. He could present no plan for the care of the children until his
release. Those facts, coupled with the evidence of a history of family violence and other
criminal conduct, were sufficient, in my view, to permit the trial court to find termination of
the father’s parental rights in the best interest of the children. See In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d
256, 266 (Tex. 2004) (legal sufficiency standard). The contrary evidence, showing
appellant desired to maintain a relationship with his children, and had participated in
programs and taken other steps to address his destructive behaviors, is not insignificant.
Considering the entire record, however, the evidence permitted the trial court reasonably
to form a firm belief or conviction termination was in the children’s best interest. See In re
C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17, 25 (Tex. 2002) (factual sufficiency standard).
James T. Campbell
Justice
2