In re Amiah P.
2012 R.I. LEXIS 132
| R.I. | 2012Background
- DCYF filed a petition on September 22, 2010 in Family Court to terminate parental rights of both respondents with respect to Amiah P., born June 27, 2009.
- Amiah tested positive for cocaine at birth, prompting DCYF involvement and a preliminary neglect finding prior to the termination petition.
- Amiah had lived in the same non-relative foster home since birth and bonded with that foster family; DCYF sought permanency through adoption without open adoption.
- Respondent-father was incarcerated at the ACI; he faced a 12-year sentence with six to serve and six suspended, with release anticipated no earlier than 2014 and potential good-time release not until 2012.
- Respondent-mother had a history of chronic substance abuse and prison placements, with testimony indicating limited ability to provide for Amiah’s needs.
- Family Court conducted termination hearings in April, May, and May 2011, issuing an oral pronouncement June 20, 2011 and a written decree August 4, 2011 terminating both parents’ rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the father is unfit under § 15-7-7(a)(2)(i). | DCYF argues incarceration and related factors render father unable to care for Amiah for an extended period. | Father contends the court erred in finding unfitness solely on incarceration and related inferences. | The court correctly found father unfit based on incarceration and related duration. |
| Whether DCYF sufficiently proved parental unfitness by clear and convincing evidence. | DCYF maintained evidence showed long-term impairment to parental ability and need for permanency. | Father asserts evidence was insufficient beyond incarceration to terminate rights. | Clear and convincing evidence supported unfitness and best-interests termination. |
| Whether the trial court properly limited mother's testimony about the father's alleged innocence. | Mother argues exclusion violated due process and her ability to meaningfully defend. | Mother contends the evidence was relevant to fitness and DCYF’s case. | Court did not abuse discretion; exclusion was proper and does not impair due process. |
| Whether termination of the mother's rights was proper in light of best interests and fitness findings. | DCYF asserts termination is appropriate due to mother’s documented unfitness and bond with foster family. | Mother disputes termination but does not contest her own termination here; argues for different considerations. | Mother's termination affirmed; best interests support permanency through adoption. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Victoria L., 950 A.2d 1168 (R.I. 2008) (deference to trial court findings and substantial evidence standard in termination cases)
- In re Jazlyn P., 31 A.3d 1273 (R.I. 2011) (best interests governs after establishing unfitness by clear and convincing evidence)
- In re Destiny D., 922 A.2d 168 (R.I. 2007) (due process requiring clear and convincing evidence for termination)
- In re Amber P., 877 A.2d 608 (R.I. 2005) (incarceration length combined with other factors can support termination)
- In re Jose Luis R.H., 968 A.2d 875 (R.I. 2009) (consideration of probable duration of incarceration for termination)
- In re Raymond C., 864 A.2d 629 (R.I. 2005) (child’s right to permanency and stability weighs against protracted parental uncertainty)