136 Conn. App. 754
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- Petitioner (DCFS) filed a neglect petition and for temporary custody over Enrico S. on Oct 15, 2008 for illegal activity, domestic violence, and parental substance abuse.
- Ex parte order granted; Enrico adjudicated neglected and committed to petitioner on Mar 11, 2009, with reunification as initial goal.
- Petitioner later sought termination of parental rights and guardianship transfer; respondent and father’s rights were consolidated for trial.
- Trial occurred Sep 8–9, 2011; court found respondent has significant ongoing substance abuse, mental health, and criminal issues precluding safe parenting.
- Court found clear and convincing evidence of failure to rehabilitate and failure to demonstrate capable parental involvement within a reasonable time, and that termination was in Enrico’s best interest; reasonable reunification efforts were made.
- Respondent, self-represented, appealed Dec 27, 2011, asserting ineffective assistance of counsel and challenge to temporary custody order; appellate panel addressed procedural issues and affirmed termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination of parental rights was proper under the applicable statute. | Petitioner contends clear and convincing evidence shows failure to rehabilitate and best interests support termination. | Respondent argues against termination (claims insufficient or improper proceedings). | Termination affirmed; evidence supports best interests and statutory standards. |
| Whether the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was preserved and meritorious. | Respondent asserts ineffective assistance in the trial proceedings. | Respondent’s brief inadequate; claim deemed abandoned. | Claim abandoned due to inadequate brief; no review on merits. |
| Whether the order of temporary custody and the neglect adjudications are reviewable on appeal after termination proceedings. | Petitioner argues untimely collateral attack cannot delay final appeal. | Respondent seeks review of initial adjudications. | Untimely collateral attack on adjudications not reviewable; immediate appeal proper to protect child’s best interests. |
| Whether the trial court properly concluded reasonable efforts were made to reunite the family. | DCFS offered numerous programs addressing substance abuse and mental health. | Respondent may contest adequacy of services. | Court found that reasonable efforts were made. |
| Whether the court properly treated the father's rights separately and addressed only the mother's appeal. | Father’s rights terminated; not a party to this appeal. | N/A (not a party to the appeal). | Mother’s appeal resolved; termination of father not considered for this appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Emilie L., 126 Conn. App. 283 (2011) (pro se standard and need for citation to authority in appeals)
- In re Nicholas B., 135 Conn. App. 381 (2012) (abandonment of ineffective-assistance claim for inadequate brief)
- In re Kaitlyn A., 118 Conn. App. 14 (2009) (abandonment for inadequate brief; review limits)
- In re Stephen M., 109 Conn. App. 644 (2008) (finality of temporary custody and neglect findings for appeal timing)
- In re Alexander V., 223 Conn. 557 (1992) (counsel in termination proceedings; right to effective counsel)
- In re Dylan C., 126 Conn. App. 71 (2011) (ineffective-assistance standard requiring prejudice to show incompetence)