In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-14-00169-CV _________________ IN THE INTEREST OF R.D.S. __________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 418th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 12-05-05471 CV __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION A.N.A. appeals from an order terminating her parental rights to her minor child, R.D.S. III. The trial court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that statutory grounds existed for the termination of A.N.A.’s parental rights and that termination of A.N.A.’s parental rights would be in the best interest of the child.

See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(1)(K), (2) (West 2014).

A.N.A.’s court-appointed appellate counsel submitted a brief in which counsel contends that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re L.D.T., 161 S.W.3d 728, 731 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2005, no pet.). The brief provides counsel’s professional evaluation of the record. Counsel served A.N.A. with a copy of the Anders brief filed on her behalf. Counsel moved to withdraw and requested an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief. On August 5, 2014, we granted A.N.S. twenty days to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief was received.

We have independently reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, and we agree that any appeal would be frivolous. We conclude that no arguable grounds for appeal exist, and we therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

AFFIRMED.

_____________________________ CHARLES KREGER Justice Submitted on September 16, 2014 Opinion Delivered October 2, 2014 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.