In re A.R.
2017 Ohio 5842
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Child A.R. was removed three days after birth; agency alleged mother’s prior history with child protective services, domestic violence, unstable housing, and maternal use of synthetic marijuana (K2) while pregnant. Temporary custody to Lucas County Children Services (LCCS) was granted and A.R. was adjudicated dependent.
- Case plan for mother included domestic-violence services, mental-health/dual diagnosis assessment, parenting classes, stable housing assistance, and child services.
- LCCS moved for permanent custody after mother repeatedly failed to complete required services, missed mental-health assessment and drug screens, maintained an ongoing domestic-violence relationship with the father, and visited inconsistently (37 of 73 scheduled visits).
- Father did not appear at the final hearing; his parental rights were terminated and he did not appeal. Mother did not appear at the final hearing either; her counsel appeared and the court found service was proper (including service by publication).
- Trial court granted permanent custody to LCCS, finding by clear and convincing evidence under R.C. 2151.414(E)(1), (4), and (10) that mother failed to remedy conditions, lacked commitment (irregular visitation/support), and had abandoned the child; the court found permanent custody was in the child’s best interest and that LCCS made reasonable reunification efforts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether LCCS made reasonable efforts to reunify given child tested negative for substances | Mother: removal allegations were disputed; child had negative drug test, so agency didn’t need extensive reunification efforts | LCCS: agency provided services, referrals, case plan, housing help, and repeated attempts to engage mother | Court: LCCS made reasonable efforts under R.C. 2151.419; mother’s challenge rejected |
| Whether mother received ineffective assistance of counsel because she learned of the final hearing late | Mother: counsel failed to notify her; she was unaware until after the hearing | LCCS/court: mother was properly served (including by publication); counsel confirmed sporadic contact but knew of motion; court found service adequate | Court: no ineffective assistance under Strickland; notification/service were proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes ineffective-assistance-of-counsel standard)
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (1990) (addresses preclusion of relitigation of adjudication in subsequent appeals)