Duvall v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2011 Ark. App. 261
Ark. Ct. App.2011Background
- Appellants Jacee Duvall and Jeremy Dollar challenge a dependency-neglect adjudication concerning their son E.D., born Dec. 2, 2009.
- Duvall and Dollar’s counsel filed a no-merit brief under Linker-Flores and Rule 6-9, and the court granted withdrawal of counsel.
- DHS investigated after a child-abuse hotline call alleging threats, inadequate supervision, and environmental neglect at the home.
- Caseworker Angel Simpson testified and photographed the home; Dollar contends DHS entry violated the Fourth Amendment due to lack of warrant.
- The trial court refused to suppress the photos and later found E.D. dependent-neglected by a preponderance of the evidence, citing hazardous home conditions and firearms within reach, with hair-follicle testing ordered for both parents.
- Contempt findings against both parents for failing to submit to hair-follicle testing were issued, with incarceration suspended upon compliance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether admission of the photos violated the Fourth Amendment | Duvall (Dollar) argued DHS entry lacked a warrant | Duvall contends no Fourth Amendment violation since consent by a co-inhabitant allowed entry | No Fourth Amendment violation; voluntary consent to inspect the premises supported admission of photos |
| Whether the evidence supported dependency-neglect | DHS proved conditions endangered E.D. by inadequate shelter and hazardous environment | Parents contest the extent and duration of neglect; dispute drug-use claims | Evidence supported dependency-neglect by preponderance due to hazardous home and risk to E.D. |
| Whether contempt for failing to perform hair-follicle testing was proper | Noncompliance with court order to submit to hair-follicle tests warranted contempt | Noncompliance was admitted; court findings should stand | Contempt findings supported by preponderance of the evidence; incarceration suspended pending testing |
| Whether DHS had ongoing ability to check on the situation given parental cooperation | Court relied on lack of cooperation to support risk finding | Cooperation deficiencies were not disproven; living conditions could improve with monitoring | Trial court reasonably found risk to E.D. given ongoing noncompliance and conditions |
Key Cases Cited
- Wigley v. State, 44 S.W.3d 751 (Ark. Ct. App. 2001) (voluntary consent to enter premises suffices to permit inspection under Fourth Amendment)
- Brewer v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 43 S.W.3d 196 (Ark. App. 2001) (clear standard for reviewing fact-findings in dependency cases)
- White v. Taylor, 717 S.W.2d 497 (Ark. Ct. App. 1986) (contempt for disobedience to court order as an inherent power of the court)