in the Interest of D.J. and D.J., Children
02-17-00088-CV
| Tex. App. | Aug 3, 2017Background
- Father (D.E.J.) appealed the trial court’s termination of his parental rights to two children, D.J. and D.J.
- After a bench trial with appointed counsel, the trial court found termination grounds under Texas Family Code §161.001(b)(1)(D), (E), and (N): knowingly placing/allowing children in endangering conditions, engaging in/endangering conduct, and constructive abandonment.
- The court also found termination was in the children’s best interest under §161.001(b)(2).
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief asserting the appeal was frivolous and identifying no arguable issues; Father received notice and did not respond.
- The court of appeals independently reviewed the record, agreed the appeal was frivolous, affirmed the termination, but denied counsel’s motion to withdraw for lack of separate good cause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for §161.001(b)(1)(D) (placing/allowing children in endangering conditions) | State: evidence supports that Father placed/allowed children in dangerous conditions | Father: (via Anders) no nonfrivolous challenge to sufficiency | Affirmed — record contains no arguable grounds to overturn finding |
| Sufficiency of evidence for §161.001(b)(1)(E) (engaging in/endangering conduct) | State: Father engaged in conduct or placed children with persons who endangered them | Father: no viable issue identified | Affirmed — finding supported, no arguable appellate issue |
| Sufficiency of evidence for §161.001(b)(1)(N) (constructive abandonment) | State: Father constructively abandoned the children | Father: no viable issue identified | Affirmed — constructive abandonment finding stands |
| Best interest of the children under §161.001(b)(2) and appellate reviewability under Anders | State: termination is in children’s best interest; Anders procedures applicable and court must independently review | Father: no response/argument provided | Affirmed — best-interest finding upheld; Anders review finds appeal frivolous; counsel may not withdraw without separate good cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (establishes procedures when counsel believes appeal is frivolous)
- Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (appellate court must independently review record for frivolous appeals)
- In re K.M., 98 S.W.3d 774 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2003) (Anders procedures apply in parental termination appeals)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (standard for finding no arguable grounds on appeal)
- In re K.R.C., 346 S.W.3d 618 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2009) (independent review requirement in family-law appellate context)
- In re C.J., 501 S.W.3d 254 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2016) (addressing counsel withdrawal and Anders motions in parental-rights cases)