Opinion
No. 04-18-00706-CV
12-21-2018
IN THE INTEREST OF R.M.C., A CHILD
From the 407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2017-PA-00998
Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding
ORDER
Shawn D. Sheffield, court-appointed counsel representing the father in this parental rights termination case, filed appellant's brief on December 16, 2018. The argument section of Appellant's brief does not "contain a clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authorities." Contra TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(i).
In the brief, the Argument section begins with general statements of the law pertaining to parental rights, the evidentiary standard, bases for terminating parental rights, the Holley factors, and the standards of review.
In the Analysis section, the brief alleges that the trial court ignored the Holley and statutory factors, and then recites four pages of facts, with citations to only the record. The four-page section concludes with a single citation to one case. But recitations of facts alone, without legal arguments with appropriate citations to authorities to apply relevant law to the facts, do not meet the standards for a brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(i); Collins v. Moroch, 339 S.W.3d 159, 164 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011, pet. denied) (applying briefing waiver for lack of legal analysis and citations to legal authorities); Canton-Carter v. Baylor Coll. of Med., 271 S.W.3d 928, 931 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.) ("Failure to cite legal authority or to provide substantive analysis of the legal issues presented results in waiver of the complaint.").
We STRIKE Appellant's brief and ORDER court-appointed attorney Shawn D. Sheffield to file an amended brief—that meets his obligations to this court and his client—within FOURTEEN DAYS of the date of this order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9 (properly presenting case); Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 315 S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010, no pet.) ("[Appellate] rules require appellants to state concisely the complaint they may have, provide understandable, succinct, and clear argument for why their complaint has merit in fact and in law, and cite and apply law that is applicable to the complaint being made along with record references that are appropriate." (emphasis added)).
The amended brief must include legal arguments for the contentions made supported by legal authorities that show how applying those authorities to the relevant facts will afford Appellant some relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(i); Canton-Carter, 271 S.W.3d at 931; Collins, 339 S.W.3d at 164.
If counsel is unable to make good-faith arguments and contentions in support of any issue which may afford Appellant some relief on appeal, counsel may file a brief and a motion to withdraw in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
/s/_________
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 21st day of December, 2018.
/s/_________
KEITH E. HOTTLE,
Clerk of Court