Harjo v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
548 S.W.3d 865
Ark. Ct. App.2018Background
- DHS removed two Indian children (ages 8 and 6) after parents were arrested; children adjudicated dependent-neglected and placed initially with maternal grandfather and later in an ICWA-compliant foster/tribal home.
- Case plan required Alecia to remain sober, participate in counseling, submit to drug screens, maintain housing/employment, and visit children; reunification was original goal.
- Alecia repeatedly missed/failed drug screens, tested positive multiple times for methamphetamine, amphetamines, THC, benzodiazepines, and alcohol, and had inconsistent contact with DHS and the children; she completed residential treatment in June–August 2017 but then missed screens and later tested positive.
- DHS changed goal to termination; termination petition filed July 2017; hearing in September 2017; trial court found by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that termination was in the children’s best interest and that three statutory grounds under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B) were proven, and that ICWA active-efforts and serious-damage requirements were met.
- Trial court terminated parental rights; Alecia appealed only the sufficiency of evidence for the statutory grounds (she did not challenge ICWA findings); this court reviews termination de novo but will not reverse unless findings are clearly erroneous.
Issues
| Issue | Harjo's Argument | DHS's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for failure-to-remedy (§ 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(i)(a)) | Harjo: sole removal cause was her arrest and charges were dismissed; thus conditions were remedied. | DHS: continued substance use, missed services, and relapse show conditions were not remedied despite services. | Court: Found evidence supported termination; not clearly erroneous (court relied on subsequent-factors ground primarily). |
| Sufficiency for willful lack of meaningful contact/significant support (§ 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(ii)(a)) | Harjo: she attended numerous visits and lived with children during trial placement; argument that court did not find willful failure to support. | DHS: Harjo missed visits, failed to maintain contact, and evaded/failed drug screens showing lack of meaningful contact. | Court: Although not central, court sustained termination on other ground; overall record supported termination. |
| Sufficiency for subsequent-factors (§ 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(vii)(a)) | Harjo: her circumstances (living with mother, employment, pursuing nursing license) and delay in offering some treatment undercut this ground. | DHS: New/subsequent substance-use relapse and continued noncompliance after extensive services demonstrated incapacity/indifference to remedy issues. | Court: Affirmed termination based on subsequent-factors ground; findings not clearly erroneous. |
| ICWA requirements (active efforts and serious harm) | Harjo did not challenge ICWA findings on appeal. | DHS: presented Indian-child-welfare expert and evidence of active efforts and risk of serious emotional/physical damage. | Court: Accepted ICWA findings; held active efforts and serious-damage proof satisfied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mitchell v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 430 S.W.3d 851 (2013) (standard of review and de novo review framework for TPR appeals)
- Sharks v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 502 S.W.3d 569 (2016) (clear-error standard explained)
- Kohlman v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 544 S.W.3d 595 (2018) (statutory requirement that at least one ground plus best interest required for termination)
- Wafford v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 495 S.W.3d 96 (2016) (only one statutory ground is necessary to terminate parental rights)
- Allen v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 384 S.W.3d 7 (2011) (continued illegal drug use and failure to comply with case plan show indifference to remedying family problems)