Date: 10-02-2014

Case Style: In the Interest of R.D.S.

Case Number: 09-14-00169-CV

Judge: Charles Kreger

Court: Texas Court of Appeals, Ninth District on appeal from the 418th District Court, Montgomery County

Plaintiff's Attorney: Sarah Stallberg for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services

Defendant's Attorney: Gardale Hatley for A.A.S.

Elizabeth Payte for J.A.V.

Donna Owen for R.D.S.

Description: A.N.A. appeals from an order terminating her parental rights to her minor
child, R.D.S. III. The trial court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that
statutory grounds existed for the termination of A.N.A.’s parental rights and that
termination of A.N.A.’s parental rights would be in the best interest of the child.
See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(1)(K), (2) (West 2014).
A.N.A.’s court-appointed appellate counsel submitted a brief in which
counsel contends that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. See
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re L.D.T., 161 S.W.3d 728, 731
(Tex. App.—Beaumont 2005, no pet.). The brief provides counsel’s professional
2
evaluation of the record. Counsel served A.N.A. with a copy of the Anders brief
filed on her behalf. Counsel moved to withdraw and requested an extension of
time for appellant to file a pro se brief. On August 5, 2014, we granted A.N.S.
twenty days to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief was received.
We have independently reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, and we
agree that any appeal would be frivolous. We conclude that no arguable grounds
for appeal exist, and we therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. We grant
counsel’s motion to withdraw.

Outcome: AFFIRMED.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: