in the Interest of E.J., J.J., V.J., and C.J.., Children ( 2017 )

IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-16-00417-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF E.J., J.J., V.J., AND C.J.X., CHILDREN
From the 85th District Court
Brazos County, Texas
Trial Court No. 15-000408-CV-85
ORDER
On March 24, 2017, appellants filed a motion for an extension of time to file their
pro se response to their appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw and supporting Anders
brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). The basis
of the motion is that one certain pretrial hearing, apparently held on July 8, 2015, was not
transcribed although it had been requested to be transcribed. Further, according to the
motion, “[Counsel] and Ms. McCright of Verbatim Reporting and Transcription LLC,
were notified by email on May 11, 2017 about the missing transcript.” No verification of
this email was included with appellants’ motion. Although we question whether the
transcription of the requested hearing is relevant to appellants’ response to counsel’s
Anders brief, we cannot, at this juncture, hold that it could not be relevant and material.
Accordingly, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services is ordered
to file a response to appellants’ motion within 7 days from the date of this order. The
response must include information from the reporter regarding the alleged request by
appellants and whether such a record was made at the referenced hearing.
PER CURIAM
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Davis, and
Justice Scoggins
Response requested
Order issued and filed May 31, 2017
In the Interest of E.J., J.J., V.J., and C.J.X., Children Page 2