In re D.T.
2014 Ohio 2332
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Mother (Teresa A.) has five children; four minors at issue: D.T., J.T., R.T., N.T. LCCS initially filed neglect/dependency complaints for the two youngest (R.T., N.T.) in Jan 2012 based on school absences, home unsanitary conditions, and unmet needs.
- Magistrate adjudicated R.T. and N.T. neglected/dependent and ordered protective supervision (children remained in Mother’s custody) on March 19, 2012; Mother did not object to that magistrate decision.
- LCCS continued involvement after access problems, concerns about Mother’s mental health, substance use, domestic violence, and a dangerous home; an amended case plan was agreed and relatives briefly cared for the children in July 2012.
- In Aug 2012 LCCS filed complaints alleging D.T. and J.T. neglected/dependent; hearings on adjudication/disposition for all four children occurred Oct–Dec 2012; magistrate adjudicated D.T. and J.T. neglected/dependent on Jan 2, 2013 and placed boys in LCCS temporary custody and girls with maternal aunt.
- Mother timely objected to the 2013 magistrate decision (and appealed) claiming insufficiency/manifest weight, transcript issues, and excluded subpoenaed witnesses; the trial court overruled objections and the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (LCCS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate court has jurisdiction/timeliness to review March 19, 2012 adjudication of R.T. and N.T. | Mother implicitly contends the adjudication can be reviewed on appeal | LCCS: March 19, 2012 order was final/appealable and untimely appealed (no appeal within 30 days) | Court: Distinguishes orders that remove custody from Murray line; because Mother did not object under Juv.R.40 to the March 2012 magistrate decision she waived review of R.T./N.T. adjudication and court will not review it on the merits |
| Whether adjudication of D.T. and J.T. as neglected/dependent is against manifest weight | Mother: LCCS failed to present clear and convincing evidence to support adjudication | LCCS: Presented evidence of filthy home, excessive absences, behavioral problems, Mother's untreated mental health/substance issues and refusal to cooperate | Court: Affirmed—ample evidence supported neglect under R.C. 2151.03(A)(2) and dependency under R.C. 2151.04(B) for D.T. and J.T. |
| Whether trial court erred by not reviewing magistrate hearing audiotapes despite transcript ‘‘unintelligible’’ notations | Mother: Judge should have listened to audiotapes to resolve unclear transcript portions | LCCS: Object preserved requirements not met; Mother relied on transcript and did not seek leave for alternative review or submit affidavits | Court: Overruled—Mother failed to follow Juv.R.40(D)(3)(b)(iii) and did not request tape review or provide affidavit, so error not preserved |
| Whether magistrate deprived Mother of due process by excluding subpoenaed witnesses | Mother: Exclusion denied her right to present a defense | LCCS: Witnesses failed to appear; Mother did not proffer their testimony or object on that ground below | Court: Overruled—Mother failed to proffer substance as required by Evid.R.103(A)(2) and did not preserve the issue under Juv.R.40(D)(3)(b)(iv) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (Ohio 1990) (adjudication plus temporary custody to agency is final and appealable)
- In re C.B., 129 Ohio St.3d 231 (Ohio 2011) (parental substantial right in custody supports finality when child is removed)
- In re H.F., 120 Ohio St.3d 499 (Ohio 2008) (appeal of adjudication plus award of temporary custody must be filed within 30 days)
- In re Adams, 115 Ohio St.3d 86 (Ohio 2007) (parental right in custody is a substantial right warranting appellate review)
- In re C.R., 108 Ohio St.3d 369 (Ohio 2006) (adjudication of abuse/neglect equated with parental unsuitability)