In Re DANY G.
117 A.3d 650
| Md. Ct. Spec. App. | 2015Background
- Dany G., a Guatemalan native, came to the U.S. at 17 and was placed under the guardianship of his cousin Charlene in Montgomery County, Maryland; Charlene sought state court findings to support Dany’s Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) application.
- Testimony: Dany left school at 12 to work in hazardous field labor to support his disabled parents; he has since attended high school in Maryland and relies on relatives here for support.
- The circuit court found Dany was under 21 and dependent on a court with jurisdiction, but declined to find he had been abused, abandoned, or neglected under Maryland law and declined to find it would be contrary to his best interest to return to Guatemala.
- The court’s refusal turned on its view that Dany’s parents had not literally left him to fend for himself, and that it could not conclude it was not in his best interest to be with family in Guatemala.
- The Court of Special Appeals held the trial court applied the wrong legal standard for neglect and best-interest SIJ predicate findings and remanded for reconsideration under Maryland law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court should find reunification not viable because of parental neglect under state law | Charlene: Dany was neglected — parents forced him to stop schooling at 12 and work long, hazardous hours, harming his welfare | Trial court: Parents did not abandon him or “leave him to fend for himself,” so neglect not established | Court held trial court used the wrong standard; must apply Maryland neglect definition (failure to give proper care that harms or places child at substantial risk) and remand for findings |
| Whether it is not in Dany’s best interest to be returned to Guatemala | Charlene: Remaining in Maryland (guardianship, education) is in Dany’s best interest given the harmful conditions he fled | Trial court: Cannot find it is not in his best interest to be with his family in Guatemala | Court held best-interest determination was tainted by the incorrect neglect analysis; abused discretion—remand for proper comparison of life in Maryland vs. conditions he would face in Guatemala |
Key Cases Cited
- Simbaina v. Bunay, 221 Md. App. 440 (Md. Ct. Spec. App.) (state juvenile court’s role in SIJ predicate findings)
- Perez-Olano v. Gonzalez, 248 F.R.D. 248 (D. Md. 2008) (SIJ provisions provide path to LPR for abused/neglected/abandoned children)
- In re Y.M., 207 Cal. App. 4th 892 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) (humanitarian purpose of SIJ and appropriateness of state court findings)
- Wilson X v. Dep’t of Human Res., 403 Md. 667 (Md. 2008) (abuse found when court acts without guiding rules or principles)