In the Interest of R.R.L., a Child v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Eleventh Court of Appeals of Texas reviewed an accelerated appeal from an order terminating the parental rights of both parents of R.R.L. The court affirmed the termination order as to the mother after an Anders review and denied appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw as premature under In re P.M. The court also held that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support termination based on endangerment findings under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(D) and (E), among other grounds.

Holdings

1. Appointed counsel's Anders brief satisfied the required professional review and demonstrated that mother's appeal was frivolous and without merit, but counsel's motion to withdraw filed in the court of appeals was premature because appointed counsel's duty in a parental-rights-termination case generally extends through exhaustion of all appeals.
2. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to establish that the father knowingly placed or knowingly allowed R.R.L. to remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered the child's physical or emotional well-being.
3. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to establish that the father engaged in a voluntary, deliberate, and conscious course of conduct that endangered R.R.L.'s physical or emotional well-being.
4. Because the evidence sufficiently supported termination under subsection (D) and subsection (E), the court did not need to reach the father's challenges to the findings under subsections (N) and (O).
5. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of the father's parental rights was in R.R.L.'s best interest.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(D), based on knowingly placing or allowing the child to remain in endangering conditions or surroundings.
2. Whether the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(E), based on a course of conduct that endangered the child.
3. Whether the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support termination under sections 161.001(b)(1)(N) and (O).
4. Whether the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of the father's parental rights was in the child's best interest.
5. Whether mother's appointed counsel satisfied Anders obligations and could withdraw before the conclusion of all appeals in a parental-rights-termination case.

Disposition

affirmed