In re A.M. (D.H. v. State)
2012 UT App 79
| Utah Ct. App. | 2012Background
- D.H. (Mother) appeals an order granting permanent custody and guardianship of A.M. to non-relatives.
- A.M. was adjudicated neglected after Mother admitted allegations under Utah Rule of Juvenile Procedure 34(e).
- Initial permanency goal was reunification with Mother; DCFS was ordered to provide reunification services.
- Juvenile court found that returning A.M. would present substantial risk of detriment and terminated reunification services.
- Permanency goal changed to custody/guardianship with non-relatives; later, permanent custody/guardianship was granted to foster parents and juvenile court jurisdiction was terminated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for permanent custody | Mother asserts insufficient evidence to support a change from reunification to custody with non-relatives. | State argues the evidence supports safety of non-relative custody and proper permanency planning. | Evidence supported the order; affirm. |
| Correct application of the burden and standard of proof | Mother contends the court improperly required termination-like proof of unfitness. | State asserts no termination burden; preponderance suffices to determine safety for return. | Court applied correct preponderance standard; decision affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re J.P., 921 P.2d 1012 (Utah Ct. App. 1996) (permanency outcomes may be revisited; not a termination analysis)
- In re M.W., 12 P.3d 80 (Utah 2000) (parental presumption not available where neglect adjudication exists)
- In re B.R., 171 P.3d 435 (Utah 2007) (appellate court should not reweigh evidence where basis exists)