Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

J.Y.S. v. Texas Department of Family And Protective Services

Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, Austin

January 31, 2014

J. Y. S., Appellant
v.
Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 340TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. C-12-0091-CPS, HONORABLE JAY K. WEATHERBY, JUDGE PRESIDING

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Field

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Scott K. Field, Justice

J.Y.S. appeals from the trial court's order terminating her parental rights to her minor children. See Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001. In support of its petition to terminate J.Y.S.'s parental rights, the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (the Department) alleged that J.Y.S. failed to comply with the provisions of her court-ordered service plan. See id. § 161.001(1)(O). The Department also alleged that termination of J.Y.S.'s parental rights was in the children's best interest. See id. § 161.001(2). Following a termination hearing, the trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that statutory grounds for terminating J.Y.S.'s parental rights existed and that termination was in the children's best interest.

On appeal, J.Y.S.'s court-appointed attorney has filed an Anders brief informing this Court that she has made a diligent review of the appellate record and can find no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Taylor v. Texas Dep't of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646–47 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied) (applying Anders procedure in appeal from termination of parental rights). Counsel provided J.Y.S. with a copy of the Anders brief along with a notice advising J.Y.S. of her right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

Upon receiving an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of all of the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). We have reviewed the entire record, including the Anders brief submitted on J.Y.S.'s behalf, and we have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. We agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the trial ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.