in the Interest of E.H. and D.S., Children
12-16-00178-CV
Tex. App.Oct 31, 2016Background
- T.S. (mother) and D.S. (father) are the parents of two children born in 2013 and 2014; the Department of Family and Protective Services filed for protection, conservatorship, and termination on March 19, 2015.
- The Department was named temporary managing conservator; T.S. received limited temporary possessory conservatorship.
- After trial, the court found by clear and convincing evidence that T.S. committed acts supporting termination under Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b)(1)(D), (E), (N), and (O) and that termination was in the children’s best interest.
- The court found D.S. to be the children’s father and found by clear and convincing evidence that he committed acts supporting termination under subsections (D) and (E); the court also found termination was in the children’s best interest.
- The parents’ appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding the appeal is frivolous; the appellate court conducted an independent review and agreed there were no arguable grounds for reversal.
- The court affirmed the trial court’s termination judgment and noted counsel has an ongoing obligation to the parents should they wish to pursue a petition for review to the Texas Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to terminate T.S.’s parental rights under §161.001(b)(1)(D),(E),(N),(O) | Dept.: Clear and convincing evidence supports termination for the listed statutory grounds and best interest | T.S.: Counsel raised no non-frivolous grounds on appeal (Anders brief) | Affirmed — trial court findings supported termination and best interest |
| Sufficiency of evidence to terminate D.S.’s parental rights under §161.001(b)(1)(D),(E) | Dept.: Clear and convincing evidence supports termination for (D) and (E) and best interest | D.S.: Counsel raised no non-frivolous grounds on appeal (Anders brief) | Affirmed — trial court findings supported termination and best interest |
| Appellate counsel’s Anders compliance and whether appeal is frivolous | Counsel: Record review yields no reversible error; Anders brief provided to parents | Parents: given opportunity to file pro se briefs or pursue further review; no pro se briefs filed | Affirmed — independent review found appeal frivolous; counsel must still comply with Texas Supreme Court filing obligations if parents seek review |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedures for counsel to follow when concluding an appeal is frivolous)
- Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969) (Texas precedent cited for Anders-type procedure)
- In re K.S.M., 61 S.W.3d 632 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2001) (Anders procedures applied in parental-rights termination appeals)
- Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (requirement for independent appellate review of Anders brief)
- Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995) (discussing Anders compliance and appellate review)
- Taylor v. Tex. Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005) (standard for reviewing termination evidence)