In Re Commitment of Terry Lee Hayden v. the State of Texas

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

________________

NO. 09-24-00257-CV
________________

IN RE COMMITMENT OF TERRY LEE HAYDEN

________________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 253rd District Court
Liberty County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 23DC-CV-00484
________________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that Terry Lee Hayden (“Hayden”)

is a sexually violent predator. The trial court rendered a final judgment and an order

of civil commitment. We affirm.

After perfecting appeal, Hayden’s appellate counsel filed a brief certifying

that the appeal is frivolous. Appellate counsel’s brief presents counsel’s professional

evaluation of the record and asks this Court to accept the Anders brief. See Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Commitment of Rayson, No. 09-06-081-

CV, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 2168 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Mar. 22, 2007, no pet.)

1
(mem. op.) (applying Anders procedure in a Chapter 841 civil-commitment appeal).

Although Hayden’s attorney also filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel, we decline

to grant the motion at this time, believing that it may be premature, since counsel

may continue to represent Hayden until he exhausts his appeals. 1

On February 21, 2025, we notified Hayden of his right to file a post-

submission pro se brief and the March 24, 2025 deadline for doing so, but Hayden

filed no response.

We have reviewed the entire appellate record and determined that this appeal

is wholly frivolous. We conclude that the Anders brief filed by appellate counsel

adequately presents the case, and additional briefing will not aid in the satisfactory

submission on appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.9. We find no arguable error requiring

further action in this case. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

JAY WRIGHT
Justice

Submitted on March 13, 2025
Opinion Delivered April 10, 2025

Before Johnson, Wright and Chambers, JJ.

1
We note that if Hayden decides to pursue review by the Supreme Court of
Texas, counsel may satisfy his obligations to Hayden “by filing a petition for review
that satisfies the standards for an Anders brief.” In re P.M., 520 S.W.3d 24, 27-28
(Tex. 2016).
2