Background
The trial court terminated A.W.’s parental rights to her daughter, H.F., after finding that the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services proved two conduct-based statutory grounds for termination and that termination was in the child’s best interest. The court appointed the Department as the child’s permanent managing conservator. The father’s parental rights were also terminated, but he did not appeal.
Mother’s appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding that the appeal was frivolous. Mother filed a pro se response raising general concerns about the trial evidence, the fairness of the proceedings, her ability to complete services, and her recent efforts toward sobriety. The record, however, reflected repeated positive or missed drug tests, discharge from therapy for nonattendance, homelessness, and unemployment. The appellate court could not consider documents Mother said she possessed because they had not been admitted at trial.
The Court’s Holding
The Second Court of Appeals independently reviewed the appellate record, counsel’s Anders brief, and Mother’s pro se response. It found no arguable ground for appeal and no reversible error, agreed that the appeal lacked merit, and affirmed the order terminating Mother’s parental rights.
The court denied appointed counsel’s request to withdraw because counsel’s conclusion that the appeal was frivolous did not independently establish good cause for withdrawal. Counsel therefore remained appointed through any proceedings in the Texas Supreme Court unless otherwise relieved of those duties.
Key Takeaways
- An appellate court reviewing an Anders brief in a parental-rights termination case must independently examine the record for arguable grounds for appeal.
- Evidence not admitted in the trial court cannot support reversal on appeal, and unsupported general complaints do not present an arguable appellate issue.
- Appointed counsel may not withdraw solely because the appeal is frivolous and ordinarily remains responsible through Texas Supreme Court proceedings unless relieved.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates how Texas appellate courts apply Anders procedures in accelerated parental-rights termination appeals while independently safeguarding the parent’s right to meaningful appellate review. It also underscores that pro se challenges must be grounded in the trial record and identify a legally arguable basis for reversal.
The ruling further emphasizes the continuing obligations of appointed counsel after an unsuccessful termination appeal, even when counsel has established that the appeal is frivolous.