A. C. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services
03-16-00543-CV
| Tex. App. | Oct 5, 2016Background
- Mother A.C. appealed the termination of her parental rights to two minor children, D.L. and C.L., under Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001.
- After a termination hearing, the trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds for termination existed and that termination was in the children’s best interest.
- A.C.’s court‑appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw, concluding the appeal is frivolous and presenting an evaluation of the record explaining why no arguable issues exist.
- Counsel certified that A.C. received the Anders brief, was informed of her rights to review the record and to file a pro se brief; A.C. filed no pro se brief.
- The Department of Family and Protective Services waived filing an appellee’s brief unless a pro se brief was filed by A.C.
- The court conducted a full review of the record under Anders/Penson and affirmed the trial court’s termination order; it denied counsel’s motion to withdraw pending possible further proceedings in the Texas Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statutory grounds for termination were proven by clear and convincing evidence | A.C. contended the termination was unsupported (no arguable grounds advanced on appeal) | Department maintained trial court’s findings were supported | Court found no arguable challenge; affirmed that statutory grounds were established |
| Whether termination was in children’s best interest | A.C. argued termination was not shown to be in best interest (no pro se brief) | Department argued best‑interest finding was supported | Court affirmed best‑interest finding as supported |
| Whether counsel’s Anders brief adequately evaluated the record | A.C. (through counsel) provided Anders brief asserting frivolity and meeting Anders requirements | Department waived response unless pro se brief filed | Court held Anders brief sufficient and conducted independent review; found appeal frivolous |
| Whether counsel may withdraw at this stage | A.C. sought appellate counsel withdrawal via Anders motion | Department did not oppose withdrawal unless further review pursued | Court denied withdrawal, noting counsel’s obligations remain for potential petition for review to Texas Supreme Court |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedure when counsel believes appeal is frivolous)
- Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (U.S. 1988) (appellate court must conduct full examination of record after Anders brief)
- Taylor v. Texas Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005) (applying Anders procedure in parental‑rights termination appeal)