| Close=20
This Window | |
|
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, = THIRD=20 DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-08-00155-CV
v. Texas Department of Family and = Protective=20 Services, Appellee
FROM THE = DISTRICT=20 COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 395TH JUDICIAL=20 DISTRICT NO. = 06-2032-F395,=20 HONORABLE MICHAEL JERGINS, JUDGE PRESIDING
I concur in the judgment only. The record in this case reflects = that=20 the Department moved to terminate appellant's parental rights to = her two=20 children on six alternative grounds. A finding on any one of these = grounds, coupled with a finding that termination is in the best = interest=20 of the child, is sufficient to terminate parental rights. = See=20 Tex. Fam. Code Ann. =A7 161.001 (West 2008). Consistent = with=20 controlling precedent, the trial court submitted the cause upon = broadform=20 questions. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 277; Texas Dep't of = Human=20 Servs. v. E.B., 802 S.W.2d 647, 649 (Tex. 1990) (approving of = broadform submission in parental rights cases). Without specifying = which=20 of the six grounds it was relying on, the jury in this case = answered the=20 controlling question and found that it was in the best interest of = the=20 children to terminate appellant's parental rights. See = E.B., 802=20 S.W.2d at 649 (controlling question is whether parent-child = relationship=20 should be terminated, not what specific ground or grounds jury = relied on=20 to answer affirmatively the questions posed). The trial court = entered=20 judgment on the jury's verdict. Appellant challenges the trial court's judgment terminating her = parental rights on the ground that her conviction was not final = and,=20 therefore, evidence relating to that conviction should not have = been=20 admitted or considered in determining whether to terminate her = parental=20 rights. But the evidence relating to appellant's conviction, even = if not=20 final, goes only towards two of the six grounds for = termination=20 alleged by the Department. Because there is sufficient evidence in = the=20 record before us to support the trial court's judgment on at least = one of=20 the four remaining grounds for termination alleged by the = Department, I=20 would affirm the trial court's judgment. See Tex. Fam. = Code Ann.=20 =A7 161.001(1); In re Marriage of Hill, 893 S.W.2d = 753, 756=20 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 1995, writ ref'd). __________________________________________ Jan P. Patterson, Justice Before Justices Patterson, Pemberton and Waldrop Filed: July 31, = 2009 |