In Re: C.S., 17-0470

DHHR filed an abuse-and-neglect petition (Apr 2016) alleging mother abused drugs and neglected C.S.; petitioner father (R.C.) was accused only of abandonment due to incarceration.
Petitioner was incarcerated throughout the proceedings and requested transport or video appearance for adjudicatory and dispositional hearings; the circuit court denied those requests.
At adjudication the court proceeded in father’s absence, heard proffers mainly about the mother, presented no evidence specific to the father, and adjudicated him an abusing parent for abandonment and failure to protect.
At disposition the court again refused father’s presence, received no additional evidence about him beyond incarceration, and terminated his parental rights (Dec 23, 2016).
On appeal DHHR and the guardian conceded the record contained no evidentiary support for the abandonment finding against the father and that statutory hearing protections were not followed.
The Supreme Court of Appeals vacated the adjudicatory and dispositional orders and remanded for hearings compliant with Chapter 49 and the Rules of Procedure for Child Abuse and Neglect Proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether court adjudicated father without affording a meaningful opportunity to be heard	Father: adjudication violated WV Code §49-4-601(h); he was denied presence and chance to testify	State: (conceded) no evidence supporting adjudication as to father	Court: vacated adjudication; adjudicatory hearing did not comply with statute and must be held
Whether termination was proper where disposition relied only on incarceration	Father: termination based solely on incarceration was insufficient; he should have been allowed to present mitigation and improvement plan	State/guardian: conceded lack of evidence and agreed hearing was deficient	Court: vacated dispositional order; disposition must evaluate incarceration plus other factors and allow father to be heard
Whether denial of transport/video appearance violated procedural rights	Father: requested transport or video for adjudication and disposition; denial denied meaningful opportunity to be heard	State: did not dispute failure to permit father’s participation in record	Court: denial was error; father entitled to opportunity to testify and present evidence
Whether evidence met clear-and-convincing standard for abandonment	Father: DHHR produced only incarceration; proffered parole prospects and willingness to participate in improvement period	State: produced no testimony/documents on abandonment as to father	Court: DHHR failed to meet burden as to father; adjudication unsupported and vacated

In re Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223 (W. Va. 1996) (standard of review for circuit-court factual findings in abuse-and-neglect cases)
In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89 (W. Va. 2011) (incarceration may support termination only after factor-based analysis of offense, confinement terms, and permanence needs)
In Interest of S.C., 168 W.Va. 366 (W. Va. 1981) (DHHR bears clear-and-convincing burden at adjudication; statute does not prescribe specific mode of proof)
State ex rel. DHHR v. Hill, 207 W.Va. 358 (W. Va. 1999) (disposition must specifically and thoroughly address termination where abandonment alleged and proven)