2020 Ohio 6663
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Two children: D.P. (b. 2014) and I.P. (b. 2016). Police removed them Nov. 29, 2017 after father was found passed out in a restaurant bathroom with D.P.; Mother reported homelessness and tested positive for THC and fentanyl.
- Juvenile court adjudicated both children dependent (Feb. 2018) and placed them in temporary custody of Butler County Dept. of Job & Family Services, Children Services Division (BCDJFS).
- Case plan required sobriety, substance‑abuse assessment/treatment, random drug screens, stable housing, and employment; Mother was admitted then expelled from Family Treatment Drug Court after multiple violations (positive screen for cocaine, ~19 missed screens, new criminal issues).
- BCDJFS moved for permanent custody Aug. 21, 2019; three‑day hearing held Feb. 2020. Mother testified she could parent with more time but had been unemployed, pregnant, and without stable income or housing.
- Magistrate granted permanent custody to BCDJFS (Feb. 24, 2020); juvenile court overruled Mother’s objections and adopted the magistrate’s decision (June 12, 2020). Mother appealed.
- Trial court found statutory custody prong met (children in agency custody >12 months of a 22‑month period) and that best‑interest factors favored permanent custody due to Mother’s unresolved substance abuse, unstable housing and finances, and concerns about her live‑in boyfriend; foster parents intended to adopt.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | BCDJFS’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the juvenile court’s grant of permanent custody to BCDJFS was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence | Mother contends she completed required services, has a strong bond with the children, and thus the decision lacks sufficient evidence / is against manifest weight | Mother failed to substantially remedy removal causes: ongoing substance abuse, noncompliance with FTDC, missed/positive drug screens, unstable housing and finances, risky live‑in boyfriend; children had been in agency custody long enough and need a legally secure placement | Affirmed. Court found ample credible evidence Mother had not remedied the conditions and that permanent custody was in the children’s best interest; decision not against the manifest weight of the evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (state must prove termination standards by clear and convincing evidence before severing parental rights)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (standard for appellate review of manifest‑weight challenges and deference to factfinder)