# In the Interest of D.M.

> Court of Appeals of Texas · August 15, 2007 · 244 S.W.3d 397

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5108312

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Interest of D.M. and W.M., Children
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** August 15, 2007
- **Citations:** 244 S.W.3d 397; 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 6499
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Gray, Reyna, Vance
- **Cited by:** 30 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5108312

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- concluding that subsection 263.405(b) and 263.405(i) violated appellant’s due process rights where appellate counsel was not appointed until after deadline for filing statement of points
- holding statute as applied to indigent mother violated her due process rights

## Opinion text

OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Rhonda Moncrief brings this appeal from a decree terminating her parental rights. The judgment is affirmed. See Lozano v. Lozano, 52 S.W.3d 141, 143-44 (Tex.2001) (per curiam); see also Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 239-40 , 92 S.Ct. 2726, 2727 , 33 L.Ed.2d 346 (1972) (per curiam); Gilles v. Ware, 615 A.2d 533, 534 (D.C.1992) (per curiam).
Chief Justice GRAY concurs.
Justice REYNA concurs.
Justice VANCE dissents.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5108312. Public record. Not legal advice.