In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ________________ NO. 09-24-00257-CV ________________ IN RE COMMITMENT OF TERRY LEE HAYDEN ________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 253rd District Court Liberty County, Texas Trial Cause No. 23DC-CV-00484 ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that Terry Lee Hayden (“Hayden”) is a sexually violent predator. The trial court rendered a final judgment and an order of civil commitment. We affirm.

After perfecting appeal, Hayden’s appellate counsel filed a brief certifying that the appeal is frivolous. Appellate counsel’s brief presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and asks this Court to accept the Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Commitment of Rayson, No. 09-06-081- CV, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 2168 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Mar. 22, 2007, no pet.)

(mem. op.) (applying Anders procedure in a Chapter 841 civil-commitment appeal).

Although Hayden’s attorney also filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel, we decline to grant the motion at this time, believing that it may be premature, since counsel may continue to represent Hayden until he exhausts his appeals. 1 On February 21, 2025, we notified Hayden of his right to file a post- submission pro se brief and the March 24, 2025 deadline for doing so, but Hayden filed no response.

We have reviewed the entire appellate record and determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We conclude that the Anders brief filed by appellate counsel adequately presents the case, and additional briefing will not aid in the satisfactory submission on appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.9. We find no arguable error requiring further action in this case. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

JAY WRIGHT Justice Submitted on March 13, 2025 Opinion Delivered April 10, 2025 Before Johnson, Wright and Chambers, JJ.

We note that if Hayden decides to pursue review by the Supreme Court of Texas, counsel may satisfy his obligations to Hayden “by filing a petition for review that satisfies the standards for an Anders brief.” In re P.M., 520 S.W.3d 24, 27-28 (Tex. 2016).