In the Interest of C.L.C. — Affirmed termination of the mother’s parental rights after finding no arguable appellate issue

Case
In the Interest of C.L.C.
Court
Texas Ninth Court of Appeals at Beaumont
Judge
LEANNE JOHNSON (Rick Perry, 2013); Wright; Chambers
Date Decided
September 17, 2026
Docket No.
09-26-00179-CV
Topics
Parental Rights, Termination, Anders Review
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

K.C., identified by the pseudonym Kimberly, appealed an Orange County trial court order terminating her parental rights to her one-year-old son, C.L.C., identified as Caleb. The trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds for termination existed under Texas Family Code sections 161.001(b)(1)(D), (E), (I), (N), and (O), and that termination was in the child’s best interest.

Kimberly’s appointed appellate attorney filed an Anders brief stating that the appeal was frivolous and presented no meritorious grounds for reversal. Counsel provided Kimberly with the brief and information about filing a pro se response and accessing the record. The court also notified Kimberly of her right and deadline to respond, but she filed no response.

The Court’s Holding

The Texas Ninth Court of Appeals independently reviewed the appellate record and counsel’s Anders brief. It found nothing that would arguably support the appeal and agreed with counsel that the appeal was frivolous and lacked merit.

Because its review disclosed no arguable appellate issue, the court concluded that appointing new counsel to rebrief the case was unnecessary. It affirmed the trial court’s order terminating Kimberly’s parental rights.

Key Takeaways

  • Anders procedures apply to appeals from parental-rights termination orders.
  • The appellate court independently reviewed the record and found no arguable ground for appeal.
  • The court affirmed the termination order without appointing replacement counsel for further briefing.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates how Texas appellate courts conduct Anders review in parental-rights termination cases: counsel’s assessment that an appeal is frivolous does not end the inquiry, because the court must independently examine the record for arguable error.

It also confirms that when this independent review reveals no potentially meritorious issue, the court may affirm the termination order without requiring new counsel to file another brief.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top