Barnes v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
508 S.W.3d 917
Ark. Ct. App.2016Background
- Five children removed after youngest (E.H.) born with cocaine in his system; mother Erica Barnes tested positive for cocaine and oxycodone and had additional positive alcohol screens during the case. DHS adjudicated the children dependent-neglected and provided intensive "Zero to Three" services.
- Barnes completed numerous services (outpatient treatment, AA, parenting classes, psychological evaluation) but exhibited housing instability, unpaid utilities/rent, inconsistent parenting (needed redirection during visits), and a positive hair-follicle test for cocaine in February 2016.
- Father Tyshon Hall was incarcerated for probation revocations and more recently served a portion of concurrent 36-month sentences; released on parole in January 2016, subject to conditions through February 2018, and had a positive hair-follicle test for cocaine in February 2016. He visited children after release and sought reunification.
- DHS filed to terminate Barnes’s rights on three statutory grounds (failure to remedy, subsequent other factors, aggravated circumstances) and to terminate Hall’s rights on multiple grounds including being sentenced in a criminal proceeding for a substantial portion of the children’s lives.
- Trial court found (by clear and convincing evidence) aggravated circumstances as to Barnes (little likelihood further services would enable reunification), found the children adoptable, and terminated parental rights of both parents; only one statutory ground needed to support termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to terminate Barnes (failure-to-remedy / subsequent-issues / aggravated circumstances) | Barnes: DHS failed to provide meaningful services (e.g., inpatient treatment, budgeting, cash assistance); completion of services should preclude "little likelihood" finding | DHS: Despite services offered/completed, Barnes remained unstable, lacked insight, had housing/utilities problems, positive drug test, and unaddressed parenting deficits | Court affirmed termination on aggravated-circumstances ground: clear & convincing evidence that further services were unlikely to achieve reunification |
| Best interest / adoptability | Barnes: Termination not in children’s best interest; some children allegedly not adoptable | DHS: Adoption specialist testified children were adoptable; best-interest includes likelihood of adoption and potential harm on return | Court found children adoptable and terminating parental rights was in their best interest |
| Hall: Notice/pleading of potential-harm element | Hall: DHS failed to plead the potential-harm prong adequately, so he lacked notice | DHS/Court: Potential harm is part of best-interest analysis, not a separate statutory ground to plead | Court rejected Hall’s pleading argument; potential-harm is an element of best-interest, not a separate ground requiring pleading |
| Hall: Sentenced-in-a-criminal-proceeding ground / best interest | Hall: DHS "ignored" him; with services he could parent; incarceration history shouldn’t mandate termination | DHS: Hall’s recent 36-month sentences (served ~9 months), parole through 2018, and positive drug test made reincarceration risk and a substantial portion of the young children’s lives at risk | Court held the sentenced-in-a-criminal-proceeding ground supported termination as a substantial portion of the children’s lives and a best-interest basis to terminate |
Key Cases Cited
- Griffin v. Ark. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 236 S.W.3d 570 (Ark. Ct. App. 2006) (standards of review in termination appeals)
- Lee v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 285 S.W.3d 277 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008) (only one statutory ground required to support termination)
- Davis v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 370 S.W.3d 283 (Ark. Ct. App. 2009) (completion of case plan may not defeat termination if parent remains incapable)
- Wright v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 115 S.W.3d 332 (Ark. Ct. App. 2003) (same principle regarding sufficiency beyond case-plan completion)
- Moses v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 441 S.W.3d 54 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014) (criminal sentence and risk of reincarceration relevant to best-interest analysis)
- Sarut v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 455 S.W.3d 341 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015) (aggravated-circumstances analysis and little-likelihood-of-reunification standard)