In the Interest of D.S., D.S.M. AKA D.M., D.R.K., Children v. Department of Family and Protective ServicesAppeal from 312th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued May 28, 2014 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-14-00092-CV NO. 01-14-00097-CV NO. 01-14-00098-CV IN THE INTEREST OF D.S., D.S.M. AKA D.M., D.R.K., CHILDREN On Appeal from the 312th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 2012-44551, 2012-03840J, 2010-787221 MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 Appellate cause number 01-14-00092-CV; trial court cause number 2012-44551. Appellate cause number 01-14-00097-CV; trial court cause number 2012-03840J. Appellate cause number 01-14-00098-CV; trial court cause number 2010-78722. Appellant, Ebonee Shantrell Miles, appeals the trial court s final orders terminating her parental rights to the three minor children, D.S., D.S.M. aka D.M., and D.R.K. Appellant s appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, along with an Anders brief, asserting that the appeals are without merit and that there are no arguable grounds for reversal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). We affirm the trial court s judgments and grant counsel s motion to withdraw. The procedures set forth in Anders are applicable to an appeal from a trial court s order terminating parental rights when, as here, the appellant s appointed appellate counsel concludes that there are no non-frivolous issues to assert on appeal. See In re D.D., 279 S.W.3d 849, 849 50 (Tex. App. Dallas 2009, pet. denied); In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326, 329 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.); In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d 66, 67 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.). Counsel has filed an Anders brief in which he concludes that, after a thorough review of the record, appellant s appeals of the termination of her parental rights are frivolous and without merit. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d at 327, 330; In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d at 67. Counsel has certified that he delivered a copy of the brief to appellant and has 2 informed appellant of her right to examine the appellate records and to file a response. See In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d at 67. Appellant has not filed a response. We have independently reviewed the entire record in each appeal and counsel s Anders brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d at 330; In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d at 67. We agree with counsel s assessment that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the trial court and grant counsel s motion to withdraw.2 Attorney Tristan H. Longino must immediately send the notice required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Brown. 2 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of these appeals and notify appellant that she may, on her own, pursue petitions for review in the Supreme Court of Texas. See In re K.D., 127 S.W.3d 66, 68 n.3 (Tex. App. Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.). 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
