in the Interest of J.P., a Child

MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-11-00403-CV IN THE INTEREST OF J.P., a Child

From the 83rd Judicial District Court, Val Verde County, Texas

Trial Court No. 28075 Honorable Bert Richardson, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Karen Angelini, Justice Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 14, 2012 AFFIRMED

Appellant Mother M.P. and Appellant Father B.C. appeal the trial court’s order terminating their parental rights to J.P. Both of Appellants’ court-appointed attorneys have filed briefs containing a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. Both of Appellants’ court-appointed attorneys have, respectively, concluded that this appeal is without merit. Both briefs meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See In re R.R., No. 04–03–00096–CV, 2003 WL 21157944, at *4 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order) (applying Anders procedure in appeal from termination of parental rights), disp. on merits, 2003 WL 22080522 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, no pet.). Further, Appellant Mother M.P.’s counsel states that he provided Appellant Mother M.P. with a copy of the brief and informed her of her right to review the record and file a pro se brief. Similarly, Appellant Father B.C.’s counsel states that he provided Appellant Father B.C. with a copy of the brief and informed him of his right to review the record and file a pro se brief. Neither Appellant Mother M.P. nor Appellant Father B.C. has filed a pro se brief.

After reviewing the record and counsels’ briefs, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Therefore, the Order of Termination signed by the trial court is affirmed. We grant counsels’ motions to withdraw. Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n. 1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.).

Karen Angelini, Justice