Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 25, 2012.

In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-12-00698-CV IN THE INTEREST OF B.S., CHILD, Appellant

On Appeal from the 314th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2011-05195J

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, S.S., appeals a final decree signed July 26, 2012, terminating her parental rights to the child who is the subject of this suit. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The Anders procedures are applicable to an appeal from the termination of parental rights when an appointed attorney concludes that there are no non-frivolous issues to assert on appeal. In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326, (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.).

Copies of counsel=s brief and the record were delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of her right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d at 329-30. More than thirty days have elapsed and as of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Seymore, Boyce, and McCally.