Fateama M. v. Dcs, J.B.
1 CA-JV 16-0024
| Ariz. Ct. App. | Oct 13, 2016Background
- On June 25, 2015 DPS found Mother and her son J.B. stranded on I-40 after at least two days without adequate food or water; Mother displayed paranoid and uncooperative behavior (refusing food/water and claiming water was poisoned).
- Emergency personnel initiated involuntary mental-health (Title 36) proceedings; Mother was admitted to Pineview Hospital and discharged June 29, 2015. A treating physician reported an acute episode tied to a severe blood-chemistry imbalance.
- DCS took J.B. into custody and filed a dependency petition alleging neglect due to Mother’s mental illness.
- A two-day adjudication hearing was held in Sept–Oct 2015; the juvenile court found J.B. dependent as to Mother, stating the state proved neglect occurred “on the 25th of June, and for several days following that.”
- On appeal, Mother argued the court relied on past conditions at removal rather than Mother’s condition at adjudication and that evidence was insufficient to prove dependency at the time of the hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | DCS’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dependency must be based on circumstances at time of adjudication rather than at time of removal | Juvenile court relied on past events (June 25) instead of current conditions at hearing; wrong time frame | Dependency can be upheld if there is objectively sufficient evidence of continuing risk at adjudication | Court: Adjudication must be based on circumstances at time of hearing; court erred by focusing on past events |
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove Mother incapable/unwilling to parent due to mental illness at time of hearing | Insufficient evidence showing ongoing mental-illness incapacity at adjudication; treating physician described episode as acute | Even if court misstated time, there was reasonable evidence of continuing threat or incapacity | Court: Evidence was not substantial enough as of the hearing; only medical testimony described an acute, not ongoing, condition; dependency reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- Shella H. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, 239 Ariz. 47 (App. 2016) (dependency must be based on circumstances at adjudication, not only at removal)
- Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 203 Ariz. 278 (App. 2002) (standard of review; appellate deference to juvenile court factual findings unless unsupported)
- Denise R. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 221 Ariz. 92 (App. 2009) (dependency adjudication requires substantial evidence to support sufficiency challenges)