in the Interest Of: L. G. v. A/K/A L.G., a Child ( 2004 )

Opinion issued February 12, 2004

    In The  

Court of Appeals  

For The  

First District of Texas  

---

  NO. 01-03-00591-CV

____________

IN THE INTEREST OF L.G.V. A/K/A L.G., A CHILD  

---

  On Appeal from the 315th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2001-08856J  

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION  

          This is an accelerated appeal from an order terminating the parental rights of appellant, Pamela Lervorne Verdun a/k/a Pamela Green, to her minor child, L.G.V. a/k/a L.G. Appellant’s counsel has filed an Anders brief and has informed this Court that he has “diligently reviewed the record” and can find no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal.

Background

          In November 2001, the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services (TDPRS) filed a petition to terminate appellant’s parental rights concerning the child. In January 2002, appellant signed an “Irrevocable Affidavit of Voluntary Relinquishment of Parental Rights” pertaining to the child.

          On May 21, 2003, following a bench trial to a trial court master, the master signed an order terminating appellant’s parental rights to the child based, in part, on appellant’s affidavit of relinquishment. The master also based her ruling on her findings “by clear and convincing evidence” that appellant had “knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the child to remain in conditions or surroundings which endanger[ed] the physical or emotional well-being of the child” and had “engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the child with persons who engaged in conduct which endanger[ed] the physical or emotional well-being of the child.” See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 263.307 (Vernon 2002). The trial court adopted the ruling of the master, subsequently denied appellant’s motion for new trial, and, pursuant to section 263.405(d)(3) of the Family Code, found that appellant’s appeal was frivolous. See id. § 263.405(d)(3) (Vernon 2002).

          Appellant’s counsel has certified to this Court that he delivered a copy of the brief to appellant by certified mail. Appellant has filed a signed “Receipt of Record,” acknowledging that her counsel gave her a copy of the record on appeal and informed her that she had a right to file a pro se response. Appellant has not filed a pro se response or a motion requesting an extension of time to file a response with this Court.

Conclusion

          We have reviewed the entire record, and we hold that there are no arguable grounds for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the trial court, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

                                                                        Terry Jennings

                                                                        Justice

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Higley.