412 S.W.3d 452
Mo. Ct. App.2013Background
- Appellants CPS and DBW adopted KS-W in December 2006 after KS-W was placed in their foster home in 2003 due to prior abuse.
- KS-W, aged 17 in August 2010, was placed in the Woodward Sexual Offender Program where he disclosed past abuse and alleged misconduct by Appellants.
- Juvenile Officer filed a petition on March 30, 2011 alleging KS-W was without proper care due to parental neglect; petition described parental admissions of neglectful conduct.
- Circuit court held hearings through April 2012; on September 21, 2012 the court sustained the petition’s allegations and KS-W was adjudicated as in need of care and subject to the court’s jurisdiction.
- Appellants argued the court relied on evidence outside the petition and hearsay; the court granted the third point on appeal, concluding prejudicial, irrelevant evidence was considered; judgment reversed and remanded for a new hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court erred in considering prejudicial, irrelevant evidence. | Appellants contend KS-W’s statements and related testimony were outside the petition and not admissible for truth. | Juvenile Officer argued some inquiry into KS-W’s statements was permissible for assessing knowledge of neglect. | Yes; court abused discretion and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.G.R., 359 S.W.3d 103 (Mo.App.2011) (standard of review for juvenile adjudications; credibility; substantial evidence)
- In re Y.S.W., 402 S.W.3d 600 (Mo.App.2013) (due process notice and opportunity to defend against allegations)
- State v. Brink, 218 S.W.3d 440 (Mo.App.2006) (waiver of objections to admissibility generally; not controlling here)