M. M. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services Appeal from 146th District Court of Bell County (memorandum opinion)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-17-00403-CV M. M., Appellant v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 146TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 282,889-B, HONORABLE JACK WELDON JONES, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION After a non-jury trial, the district court terminated appellant M.M.’s parental rights to her three minor children, D.S., K.V., and A.M. The court found that appellant committed acts and omissions justifying termination of her parental rights. See Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b)(1)(E), (N), (O). The court also found that termination of her parental rights was in the children’s best interest. Id. § 161.001(2). Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief discussing the record, the elements of the cause of action, and the standard of review and concluding that appellant has no arguable grounds for appeal and that her appeal is wholly frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also 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). Appellant’s counsel has certified to this Court that he provided appellant with a copy of the brief, along with a notice advising appellant of her right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed. Having thoroughly reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, we agree with counsel’s assessment that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We affirm the district court’s de novo decree of termination. Jeff Rose, Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Goodwin Affirmed Filed: August 30, 2017 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.