Background
M.B., identified as Father, appealed a Bell County district court decree terminating his parental rights to two children. After a bench trial, the district court found by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds for termination existed under Texas Family Code Section 161.001(b)(1)(D), (E), and (N), and that termination was in the children’s best interest.
Father’s court-appointed attorney filed an Anders brief and moved to withdraw, concluding that the appeal was frivolous and lacked merit. Counsel provided Father with the brief and motion and advised him of his rights to review the appellate record and file a pro se brief. Father did not file one.
The Court’s Holding
The Third Court of Appeals independently reviewed the entire record, including counsel’s Anders brief, and found no issue that could arguably support the appeal. The court specifically reviewed the district court’s findings under subsections (D) and (E) and found no nonfrivolous appellate issue concerning either finding.
The court therefore affirmed the final order terminating Father’s parental rights. It denied counsel’s motion to withdraw because appointed counsel’s obligations continue through proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas, including filing an Anders-compliant petition for review if Father wishes to seek further review after consulting with counsel.
Key Takeaways
- An appellate court receiving an Anders brief in a parental-rights termination appeal must independently examine the entire record to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous.
- The court found no arguable appellate issue and affirmed the termination decree, including after specifically reviewing the findings under subsections (D) and (E).
- Appointed counsel could not withdraw because the right to counsel extends to proceedings in the Supreme Court of Texas, including a potential petition for review.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates how Texas appellate courts apply the Anders procedure in parental-rights termination cases: counsel’s assessment does not end the inquiry, because the appellate court must conduct its own full review of the record.
It also confirms that affirmance by the court of appeals does not automatically discharge appointed counsel. Counsel remains responsible for assisting the parent through the petition-for-review stage as required by Texas Supreme Court precedent.