In re G.C.
2017 Ohio 4226
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- BCDJFS removed two young children in 2014 after reports of parental drug use, inadequate care, and a long history of domestic violence between Mother and Father; temporary custody was awarded to BCDJFS and dependency/neglect was stipulated.
- Parents completed many case‑plan services and had progressive visitation, including overnight unsupervised visits, until a physical altercation in July 2015 witnessed by the children led to supervised visits.
- BCDJFS moved for permanent custody in Sept. 2015; both parents separately moved for legal custody. A magistrate held multi‑day hearings in 2016 and recommended granting permanent custody to BCDJFS; the juvenile court adopted that recommendation.
- Trial testimony showed Father bonded with the children, obtained stable housing and employment, and completed many services, but also established a long violent history with Mother (including prior felony/domestic violence convictions) and continued conflict culminating in the July 2015 incident.
- The children had been in BCDJFS temporary custody for at least 12 of a consecutive 22 months and were thriving with foster parents who desired adoption.
- The juvenile court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that permanent custody to BCDJFS was in the children’s best interest; Father appealed; Mother’s counsel filed an Anders brief and her appeal was dismissed as frivolous.
Issues
| Issue | Father’s Argument | BCDJFS / Court’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the juvenile court abused its discretion by not reviewing the entire magistrate record and thereby failing to properly rule on objections | Trial counsel failed to supply portions of the transcript (GAL cross‑exam, closings), so the court could not perform independent review | Court had the record, the court stated it reviewed the complete record, and missing portions were cumulative; even if omitted, court may adopt magistrate when transcript is not provided | No abuse of discretion; assignments overruled |
| Whether Father received ineffective assistance of counsel for not providing full transcript | Counsel was deficient for not filing full transcript causing prejudice | Father did not show deficiency caused prejudice; omitted testimony was cumulative and closing argument occurred at objection hearing | Ineffective‑assistance claim rejected |
| Whether granting permanent custody to BCDJFS and denying Father legal custody was against the manifest weight of the evidence / not in children’s best interests | Father completed case‑plan, bonded with children, stable housing/employment; past violence was before children and won’t recur; relationship with Mother ended | Longstanding, violent, on‑again/off‑again parental relationship persisted into the case; July 2015 altercation occurred in front of children; children need permanency; foster family suitable for adoption | Court’s findings supported by clear and convincing evidence; permanent custody affirmed; legal custody denied |
| Whether Mother’s appeal presented nonfrivolous issues | (Mother did not press arguments; counsel filed Anders brief) | Record shows no prejudicial error | Mother's appeal dismissed as frivolous; counsel permitted to withdraw |
Key Cases Cited
- Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (U.S. 1972) (parents have an essential constitutional interest in raising their children)
- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (U.S. 1923) (discussing the liberty interest in parental decisionmaking)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (state must prove statutory grounds for termination of parental rights by clear and convincing evidence)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (Ohio 1954) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
- In re K.H., 119 Ohio St.3d 538 (Ohio 2008) (parental rights are not absolute; state may remove children for welfare reasons)