In the Interest of K.D., a Child v. the State of Texas

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-26-00102-CV
___________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF K.D., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 324th District Court
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court No. 324-758200-24

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr
MEMORANDUM OPINION

On Appellant A.C.’s (Father’s1) motion, we dismiss his appeal.

The Department of Family and Protective Services removed K.D. (Kim) from

D.B. (Mother) because it had—among other concerns—concerns about her mental

health. At the time of the removal, Mother claimed that she did not know who Kim’s

father was.

The Department filed a petition to terminate Mother’s and—after determining

his identity—Father’s parental rights to Kim. Father was in prison. The trial court

appointed his cousin and her husband as Kim’s temporary possessory conservators.

At trial, Father was not personally present but was represented by counsel. The

parties announced that they had reached an agreement. In accordance with that

agreement, the trial court signed a judgment in which

• it appointed the Department as Kim’s permanent managing
conservator;

• it appointed Mother and Father as Kim’s possessory conservators
with rights of possession and access; and

• it identified Father’s cousin and her husband as Kim’s temporary
possessory conservators.

Despite the parties’ purported agreement, which did not include termination of

any parental rights, Father’s trial counsel filed a notice of appeal and a motion to

1
To protect the child’s identity, we use an alias when referring to her and refer
to her family members by their relationship to her or by their relationship to other
family members. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 109.002(d); Tex. R. App. P. 9.8(b)(2).

2
withdraw and to appoint appellate counsel. Two days later, the trial court granted

counsel’s motion to withdraw and appointed appellate counsel, who

• filed a motion for new trial that included a letter that Father had
written from prison opposing the agreed judgment;

• obtained a hearing on the motion; and

• managed to have Father present for the hearing.

At the hearing, Father waived both his motion for new trial and his appeal.

Father now moves to dismiss his appeal. Accordingly, we grant his motion and

dismiss his appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1).

/s/ Elizabeth Kerr
Elizabeth Kerr
Justice

Delivered: April 23, 2026

3