Barnes v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2017 Ark. App. 525
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Child (O.B., born 7/16/09) was removed on 9/23/2015 after parents/guardian tested positive for methamphetamine and allegations of physical abuse and environmental neglect.
- Emergency custody and dependency-neglect adjudication were entered; reunification was the initial goal and Elizabeth Barnes was placed on a case plan requiring sobriety, drug screens, parenting classes, stable housing/employment, and cooperation with the Department.
- Barnes moved to Missouri, failed to maintain consistent contact, was incarcerated for 120 days, missed drug screens, and did not provide proof of completing case-plan tasks.
- The case goal was changed to adoption on 8/29/2016 after finding minimal compliance by Barnes and continued inability to return the child.
- DHS petitioned to terminate parental rights under multiple statutory grounds based on 12+ months out of the home, failure to remedy conditions despite services, willful failure to provide support/maintain contact, subsequent aggravating factors, and aggravated circumstances.
- After a March 2017 termination hearing the trial court found clear and convincing evidence to terminate Barnes’s parental rights and concluded termination was in the child’s best interest; Barnes appealed and counsel filed a Linker-Flores no-merit brief and moved to withdraw; no pro se points were filed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Barnes) | Defendant's Argument (DHS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statutory grounds for termination were met | Barnes implicitly argues termination was not supported (no preserved objections) | DHS: multiple statutory grounds supported by evidence of 12+ months out of home and unremedied conditions despite services | Court: Grounds proven by clear and convincing evidence; termination affirmed |
| Whether the best-interest standard favored termination | Barnes argues (not developed) that child should not be terminated to mother | DHS: child is adoptable and return would risk harm given noncompliance and lack of visitation | Court: Best interest found for termination based on adoptability and risk of harm; affirmed |
| Whether appellate counsel properly moved to withdraw via no-merit procedure | Barnes complains counsel withdrew (no pro se points filed) | DHS: Counsel complied with Linker-Flores/Rule 6-9(i); no meritorious issues preserved | Court: Counsel complied; motion to withdraw granted; appeal found wholly without merit |
| Whether denial of Barnes’s request to transfer the case to Missouri was a reversible error | Barnes objected at trial to transfer request | DHS: No developed argument below; issue not preserved for appeal | Court: Denial not preserved for appellate review; no merit to reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 359 Ark. 131 (procedure for no-merit withdrawal by appointed counsel in TPR appeals)
- Lewis v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 364 Ark. 243 (appellate scope of record review when trial court relied on prior records)
- J.T. v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 329 Ark. 243 (standard of review: termination findings must be supported by clear and convincing evidence)
- Gossett v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 374 S.W.3d 205 (proof of a single statutory ground is sufficient to terminate parental rights)
- Lamontagne v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 366 S.W.3d 351 (issues not developed below are not preserved for appeal)