In re B.H.
2018 Ohio 1238
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Lucas County Children Services (LCCS) became involved in 2014 over mother L.D.’s substance abuse and domestic violence; P.H. was adjudicated dependent and neglected in Dec. 2014; B.H. was born March 2016 and tested positive for cocaine.
- Children were placed with paternal grandmother T.T.; LCCS obtained interim temporary custody and later sought transfer of legal custody to T.T.
- Mother had a history of intermittent engagement with services, multiple positive drug tests (including cocaine), difficulty communicating with LCCS, and two contempt findings.
- Hearings established the children were bonded to T.T., doing well in her care, and that mother had not completed case-plan services.
- Magistrate recommended legal custody to T.T.; the juvenile court adopted the magistrate’s decisions and overruled mother’s objections. Mother appealed and counsel sought to withdraw under Anders.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (LCCS / T.T.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Anders brief may support counsel’s withdrawal in dispositional appeals awarding nonparent legal custody | Anders withdrawal appropriate; counsel filed Anders brief | Anders not appropriate in neglect/dependency dispositional orders granting legal custody or in termination cases; counsel must brief merits | Court declined to accept Anders withdrawal; counsel’s motion to withdraw denied; court will not accept Anders briefs in such cases going forward |
| Whether trial court abused discretion in awarding legal custody to paternal grandmother T.T. | Mother: she’s improving, maternal grandmother S.D. is suitable and closer familial bond; LCCS failed to make reasonable reunification efforts | Children bonded to T.T., thriving; mother’s ongoing substance use, noncompliance, and poor communication justify custody award to T.T. | No abuse of discretion; legal custody to T.T. affirmed |
| Whether placement with T.T. was against children’s best interests due to allegations about M.H. | Mother alleged M.H. (T.T.’s son) is a drug dealer/convict and a risk to children | Record shows no evidence M.H. will have unsupervised contact beyond court-ordered visits | Court found no showing that M.H. posed a risk that would make placement with T.T. against best interests |
| Whether any plain error exists warranting reversal | Mother: trial court biased/did not treat her fairly | LCCS/T.T.: record supports findings; no reversible error | Independent review found no plain error; judgments affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (governs counsel’s duty to identify nonfrivolous arguments when seeking to withdraw)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse-of-discretion standard defined)
- In re Hoffman, 97 Ohio St.3d 92 (Ohio 2002) (permanent-custody proceedings implicate fundamental due-process rights)