In Re: F.G.
16-1088
| W. Va. | May 22, 2017Background
- DHHR filed an abuse and neglect petition (Oct. 2015) alleging father S.G. failed to provide supervision and support because he was incarcerated; S.G. stipulated to the petition’s allegations.
- S.G. had not seen his child since 2014 and previously voluntarily relinquished parental rights to three older children.
- Criminal convictions included breaking and entering, possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, obstructing an officer, and burglary; cumulative sentence three to forty years with no guaranteed parole date or scheduled release.
- The child is of tender years and has special medical needs, making stability and permanency important.
- At the Oct. 2016 dispositional hearing the circuit court found no reasonable likelihood that the conditions of neglect could be corrected in the near future and terminated S.G.’s parental rights; the mother’s rights were also terminated and she did not appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court erred by terminating parental rights based solely on incarceration | S.G.: termination cannot be based solely on incarceration | DHHR/guardian: incarceration plus additional factors (serious offenses, lengthy/uncertain sentence, no contact, prior relinquishments, child’s needs) justify termination | Affirmed — incarceration combined with other factors supported finding no reasonable likelihood conditions could be corrected and that termination served child’s best interests |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (2011) (incarceration may support termination; courts must consider nature/length/terms of confinement and child’s need for permanency)
- In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (1996) (standard of review for bench findings of fact in abuse and neglect cases)
- In re Emily, 208 W.Va. 325, 540 S.E.2d 542 (2000) (circuit court is charged with weighing witness credibility in abuse and neglect proceedings)
- Michael D.C. v. Wanda L.C., 201 W.Va. 381, 497 S.E.2d 531 (1997) (reviewing courts should not reassess witness credibility based on the record)
- In re Katie S., 198 W.Va. 79, 479 S.E.2d 589 (1996) (termination may be used without intervening less-restrictive alternatives when no reasonable likelihood conditions can be corrected)