In the Interest of D.C., a Child--Appeal from 408th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-04-00928-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF D.C., A Child

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2003-PA-02079

Honorable John J. Specia, Jr., Judge Presiding //

Opinion by: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Sitting: Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: July 27, 2005

AFFIRMED

Joseph Cisneros appeals the trial court s determination that an appeal of the order terminating his parental rights would be frivolous. // See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 263.405 (Vernon 2002). An appeal is frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact. De La Vega v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 974 S.W.2d 152, 154 (Tex. App. San Antonio 1998, order, no pet.) (en banc); see e.g., In the Interest of M.R.R., No. 04-04-00723-CV, 2004 WL 2597449, at *1 (Tex. App. San Antonio Nov. 17, 2004, no pet.) (per curiam). In determining whether an appeal is frivolous, the trial court considers whether the appellant has presented a substantial question for appellate review. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. 13.003 (b) (Vernon 2002); De La Vega, 974 S.W.2d at 153-54. We review a trial court s determination that an appeal is frivolous under an abuse of discretion standard. De La Vega, 974 S.W.2d at 154.

At the trial on the merits, the trial court specifically found that termination of Cisneros parental rights was in the child s best interest and that the State had proven four of its alleged grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 161.001 (1) (D), (E), (N), (O) (Vernon 2002). In his statement of appellate points, Cisneros raises a number of broad constitutional issues related to due process and civil liberties, but does not allege that any specific error was committed by the trial court, either in the procedure of the trial on the merits or in the court s findings on the grounds for termination and best interest of the child. // See In re K.R.M., 147 S.W.3d 628, 630 (Tex. App. San Antonio 2004, no pet.) (in termination proceedings, the petitioner must establish one or more of the statutory grounds for termination and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child). Cisneros fails to point out where the evidence is missing or insufficient to support the trial court s termination order. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 161.001 (Vernon 2002); In the Interest of A.M.R., No. 04-03-00335-CV, 2003 WL 21467518, at *1 (Tex. App. San Antonio June 25, 2003, no pet.) (not designated for publication) (trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining appellate points were frivolous where appellant failed to summarize for trial court where the evidence was missing or insufficient to sustain the trial court s findings). Cisneros has failed to raise a substantial question for appellate review that has an arguable basis either in law or in fact. // See De La Vega, 974 S.W.2d at 153-54. After a thorough review of the record and the briefs on the merits, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that an appeal based on the points raised by Cisneros would be frivolous. We therefore affirm the trial court s judgment.

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice