In the Interest of K.N., M.N., and M.N., Children v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals, Second District, considers appeals by the parents from an order terminating their parental rights to three children. The mother challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting endangerment and best-interest findings and asserted a due-process violation based on the absence of a witness; the father’s counsel filed an Anders brief. The court states that it will affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Holdings

1. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that Mother knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the children to remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered their physical or emotional well-being.
2. The court did not reach Mother's challenge to the Subsection (E) finding because the affirmed Subsection (D) finding independently supported the termination judgment.
3. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the children's best interest.
4. After independently examining the record, the court found no arguable grounds for Father's appeal and affirmed the termination judgment as to Father.
5. Mother failed to preserve her due-process complaint because she did not raise that specific complaint in the trial court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the trial court's finding under Texas Family Code Section 161.001(b)(1)(D) that Mother knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the children to remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered their physical or emotional well-being.
2. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the trial court's finding under Texas Family Code Section 161.001(b)(1)(E) that Mother engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the children with persons whose conduct endangered their physical or emotional well-being.
3. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the children's best interest.
4. Whether Mother preserved a due-process complaint based on the trial court's refusal to continue trial until a former caseworker could be subpoenaed.
5. Whether Father's Anders brief and the appellate record revealed any arguable grounds for appeal.

Disposition

affirmed