in the Interest of A.B.R., B.R., and M.L.R., Children ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                                   Fourth Court of Appeals
    San Antonio, Texas
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    No. 04-18-00634-CV
    IN THE INTEREST OF A.B.R., B.R., Jr., and M.L.R., Children
    From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 2017-PA-02368
    Honorable Dick Alcala, Judge Presiding
    Opinion by:       Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
    Sitting:          Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
    Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
    Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
    Delivered and Filed: January 23, 2019
    REVERSED AND RENDERED
    B.R. 1 appeals from an August 21, 2018 order in which the trial court terminated his parental
    rights to his children. In the order, the trial court found B.R.:
    knowingly engaged in criminal conduct that has resulted in the father’s . . . inability
    to care for the child for not less than two years from the date of filing the petition,
    pursuant to § 161.001(b)(1)(Q), Texas Family Code.
    A finding of one of the acts or omissions listed in section 161.001(b)(1) is necessary to support an
    order terminating parental rights. TEX. FAM. CODE. § 161.001(b); In re A.V., 
    113 S.W.3d 355
    , 362
    (Tex. 2003). The trial court’s finding under subsection (Q) is the only finding of an act or omission
    1
    To protect the identity of minor children in an appeal from an order terminating parental rights, parties and children
    are referred to by their initials. See TEX. FAM. CODE § 109.002(d); TEX. R. APP. P. 9.8(b)(2).
    04-18-00634-CV
    under section 161.001(b)(1). B.R. argues the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to
    support the trial court’s finding under subsection (Q).
    The Department of Family and Protective Services agrees and “prays this Court will
    reverse the judgment of the trial court.” According to the parties and the record, the petition was
    filed only ten months before trial and the evidence establishes B.R. was released from prison before
    trial. The Department asks that we remand this case to the trial court, and B.R. on the other hand
    asks that we render an order denying the Department’s request for termination. When, as here, no
    evidence permits a reasonable factfinder to form a firm belief or conviction that a necessary finding
    is true, the evidence is legally insufficient, and rendition of judgment in favor of the parent is
    proper. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.3; In re J.F.C., 
    96 S.W.3d 256
    , 266 (Tex. 2002). We reverse the
    trial court’s order of termination 2 and render judgment denying the Department’s request for
    termination of B.R.’s parental rights.
    Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
    2
    We do not disturb other parts of the trial court’s order, including the appointment of the Department as the children’s
    permanent managing conservator, because B.R. does not challenge any other part of the order except the termination
    of his parental rights.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-18-00634-CV

Filed Date: 1/23/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021