in the Interest of J.N.M., Children ( 2013 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-13-00524-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF J.N.M., N.I.M., G.L.M., and H.Y.M., Children
From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2011-PA-02633
Honorable Richard Garcia, Judge Presiding 1
Opinion by: Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Delivered and Filed: December 18, 2013
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED
Appellant mother, Melissa R., appeals the trial court’s judgment terminating her parental
rights to her children, J.N.M., N.I.M., G.L.M., and H.Y.M. 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)-(F), (K), (N)-(Q); 161.003(a)
(West 2008 & Supp. 2012). After a bench trial, the trial court found appellant’s parental rights
should be terminated because she failed to comply with the provision of a court order that
established the actions necessary for her to obtain the return of her children. See TEX. FAM. CODE
1
The Honorable Barbara Nellermoe is the presiding judge of the 45th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas.
The termination order was signed by Associate Judge Richard Garcia.
04-13-00524-CV
ANN. § 161.001(1)(O). The trial court also determined termination would be in the best interests
of the children. 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 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. Appellant did not file 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-