In re Interest of Hannah C. & Rayna C.
A-16-1101
| Neb. Ct. App. | May 23, 2017Background
- Father Cameron C. had two daughters: Hannah (b. Mar 2014) and Rayna (b. Jun 2016). DHHS removed Hannah in Feb 2015 and Rayna at birth in Jun 2016; both became wards of the State.
- Initial petition alleged Cameron engaged in domestic violence, failed to provide proper care/supervision, and presented risk to Hannah; adjudication followed after Cameron admitted some allegations.
- Court-ordered services included drug testing, chemical dependency and psychological evaluations, a 36-week domestic violence class, parenting classes, family support, and supervised visitation; Cameron repeatedly failed to complete or maintain participation.
- Cameron had intermittent incarceration during the case, was discharged from multiple service providers for noncompliance, attended only some supervised visits (often without needed supplies and sometimes ending early), and did not complete required evaluations or classes.
- Juvenile court found statutory grounds for termination under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-292 (including subsections (2) and (7)), concluded termination was in the children’s best interests, and terminated Cameron’s parental rights; Cameron appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination was supported by statutory grounds under § 43-292 | State: evidence of neglect, noncompliance, out-of-home placement met § 43-292(2) and (7) | Cameron: did not contest grounds on appeal | Court: grounds proven by clear and convincing evidence (court affirmed) |
| Whether termination was in the children’s best interests | State: parent's failures, noncompliance, incarcerations, and ongoing risk rebut presumption of fitness | Cameron: claimed improved parenting, regular visitation, no safety issues in visits, and beneficial relationship with children | Court: presumption of fitness rebutted; termination is in children’s best interests |
| Whether less-restrictive alternatives remained | State: continued inability/unwillingness to rehabilitate; children should not wait in foster care indefinitely | Cameron: argued continued relationship and progress meant alternatives existed | Court: concluded no reasonable alternative given lack of sustained rehabilitation; termination appropriate |
| Whether appellate review should defer to juvenile court | State: de novo review applied but record supports trial court conclusions | Cameron: argued error in best-interests finding | Court: performed de novo review and affirmed trial court’s findings |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Interest of Alec S., 294 Neb. 784 (de novo review standard for juvenile cases)
- In re Interest of Sir Messiah T., et al., 279 Neb. 900 (§ 43-292 provides multiple independent grounds for termination)
- In re Interest of Elijah P., et al., 24 Neb. App. 521 (examples of neglect supporting § 43-292(2))
- In re Interest of Giavonna G., 23 Neb. App. 853 (termination only when no reasonable alternative; analysis of sufficiency under any one statutory ground)
- In re Interest of Kendra M., et al., 283 Neb. 1014 (presumption that fit parents act in children’s best interests; definition of parental unfitness)
- In re Interest of Zanaya W., et al., 291 Neb. 20 (children should not be forced to wait indefinitely for parental maturity)