Fuller v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2014 Ark. App. 9
Ark. Ct. App.2014Background
- Jackie Fuller was arrested on drug and related charges; DHS obtained emergency custody and the children were adjudicated dependent-neglected.
- DHS filed to terminate Fuller’s parental rights alleging (1) felony sentence constituting a substantial period of the children’s lives under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(viii) and (2) aggravated circumstances making reunification unlikely under § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(ix).
- The circuit court found Fuller had been convicted of drug-related charges and sentenced to two ten-year terms, and it terminated her parental rights on the statutory ground based on the sentence.
- The court also found termination served the children’s best interests, considering adoptability and risk of harm from continued contact.
- Fuller’s appellate counsel filed a Linker-Flores no-merit brief and moved to withdraw; Fuller submitted pro se points alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.
- The Court of Appeals concluded the appeal was wholly without merit, denied Fuller’s pro se ineffective-assistance claims as unpreserved, affirmed the termination, and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Issues
| Issue | Fuller’s Argument | DHS/Court’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statutory ground for termination (substantial incarceration) was met | Fuller contended termination was improper | Fuller was sentenced to two ten-year terms; this satisfied the statutory ground | Court held the sentence satisfied § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(viii) and supported termination |
| Whether aggravated-circumstances ground or other statutory grounds supported termination | Fuller disputed termination generally | DHS alleged aggravated circumstances and other grounds; court relied on incarceration ground | Court did not base termination on the other alleged grounds and found no need to address them |
| Whether termination was in children’s best interests | Fuller argued termination was not appropriate | Court considered adoptability and risk of harm and concluded termination favored children | Court held termination was in children’s best interests |
| Whether Fuller received ineffective assistance of counsel | Fuller claimed ineffective assistance by trial and appellate counsel | DHS/court noted claim was never raised in trial court and thus unpreserved on appeal | Court held ineffective-assistance claims unpreserved and without merit on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Linker-Flores v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 359 Ark. 131 (2004) (establishes procedure and standards for no-merit appeals in DHS termination cases)
- Jones v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 361 Ark. 164 (2005) (ineffective-assistance claims must be raised in trial court to be considered on appeal)