in the Interest of C.N.H., a Child

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-12-00037-CV IN THE INTEREST OF C.N.H., A Child From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2010-PA-01410 Honorable Charles Montemayor, Associate Judge Presiding 1 Opinion by: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 23, 2012

AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED

Tasha F. 2 appeals the trial court’s order terminating her parental rights to C.N.H. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §§ 161.001(1)(D), (2) (West Supp. 2011). Tasha’s court-appointed counsel filed a brief stating that he has conducted a professional evaluation of the record and there are no meritorious issues to appeal. Counsel concludes that the appeal is wholly without merit. The brief meets 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 May 21, 2003, no pet.) (applying Anders procedure in appeal from termination of parental rights), disp. on merits, 2003 WL 22080522 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 10, 2003, no pet.) (mem. op.); see also In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326, 329 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (same).

Counsel certified that he sent a copy of the Anders brief to Tasha and advised her of her right to examine the record and to file a pro se brief. Tasha has not filed a pro se brief.

After reviewing the brief and the record, we agree that the appeal is without merit. Therefore, we affirm the trial court’s order and grant counsel’s motion 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.).

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice