In the Interest of A.R.M., a Child Appeal from 57th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-20-00604-CV IN THE INTEREST OF A.R.M., a Child From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2020PA00201 Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Delivered and Filed: May 19, 2021 AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW DENIED Appellant A.M., Jr. (“Father”) appeals the trial court’s order terminating his parental rights to his child, A.R.M. Father’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw and a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record, concluding there are no arguable grounds for reversal of the termination order. The brief satisfies the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See In re P.M., 520 S.W.3d 24, 27 n.10 (Tex. 2016) (per curiam) (recognizing that Anders procedures apply in parental termination cases). Additionally, counsel represents that she provided Father with a copy of the brief and the motion to withdraw, advised Father of his right to review the record and file his own brief, and informed Father how to obtain a copy of the record, providing him with a form motion for access to the appellate record. We 04-20-00604-CV issued an order setting a deadline for Father to file a pro se brief. However, Father did not request the appellate record or file a pro se brief. After reviewing the appellate record and appointed counsel’s brief, we conclude no plausible grounds exist for reversal of the termination order. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s termination order. We deny counsel’s motion to withdraw because it does not show good cause for withdrawal. See id. at 27 & n.7 (holding that counsel’s obligations in a parental termination case extend through exhaustion or waiver of all appeals and that withdrawal should be permitted by a court of appeals “only for good cause” (citing TEX. R. CIV. P. 10)). Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice -2-

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.