2013 Ark. App. 760
Ark. Ct. App.2013Background
- DHS had an extensive history with Barbara Hill dating back to 1999, including a 2008 termination of parental rights to four of M.T. and C.H.'s siblings.
- M.T. and C.H. were removed from Barbara’s custody on Oct. 30, 2012, with emergency custody entered on Nov. 2, 2012 after Barbara texted an explicit image of her daughter to the father and a related inappropriate message.
- Barbara pleaded guilty to engaging a child in sexually explicit conduct and had her probation revoked; she began serving a three-year prison sentence and has been incarcerated since removal.
- The children were adjudicated dependent/neglected on Nov. 27, 2012; a Jan. 29, 2013 review order found aggravated circumstances and little likelihood of reunification, setting the case goal as termination.
- The termination hearing occurred on May 21, 2013; Barbara, through counsel, requested a continuance to consult with another attorney (Larry Steele); the court denied the continuance.
- The trial court terminated Barbara’s parental rights on June 10, 2013, finding grounds and that termination was in the children’s best interests; on appeal Barbara argues the continuance denial was error, but the court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the denial of Barbara’s continuance motion was an abuse of discretion | Hill | DHS argued lack of diligence and no prejudice from no continuance | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Sanderson v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2012 Ark. App. 481 (Ark. App. 2012) (continuance requires good cause; lack of diligence supports denial)
- Henderson v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. App. 481 (Ark. App. 2010) (abuse of discretion standard for continuances)
- Davis v. Pines Mall Partners, 2011 Ark. App. 783 (Ark. App. 2011) (diligence and prejudice considerations for continuance denial)