In re Interest of Kane L. & Carter L.
299 Neb. 834
| Neb. | 2018Background
- Mother Angela and father Scott used methamphetamine; Angela’s newborn’s cord blood tested positive for methamphetamine and other substances. Angela admitted meth and marijuana use during pregnancy.
- Neb. DHHS removed two minor children, Kane (b. 2008) and Carter (b. 2000), placed them temporarily with relatives, and an ex parte temporary custody order was entered Feb 17, 2017.
- Kane’s toenail test returned positive for methamphetamine (environmental exposure). Scott had a saliva test with an initial presumptive positive that later lab-tested negative.
- Juvenile court adjudicated Kane as a neglected child under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-247(3)(a) but declined to adjudicate Carter.
- Angela appealed Kane’s adjudication and evidentiary rulings; the county appealed the decision not to adjudicate Carter.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of pretrial protective custody/detention hearing (due process) | Angela: failure to hold hearing after ex parte removal was unreasonable and violated due process | State/County: counsel appointed promptly; hearing was offered/waived and parties had opportunity to be heard; no unreasonable delay | No due process violation — appointment of counsel, waiver/offer of hearing, and subsequent proceedings cure delay |
| Admissibility — cord blood and toenail drug test results (chain of custody/foundation) | Angela: county failed to establish chain of custody and testing foundation for cord blood and toenail results | State: collectors and lab director testified regarding collection, packaging, receipt, and lab procedures; cord blood corroborated by other evidence | Toenail test admissible (sufficient foundation). Any error admitting cord blood was harmless because other evidence established maternal drug use |
| Sufficiency of evidence to adjudicate Kane under § 43-247(3)(a) | Angela: no nexus shown between parental drug use and a risk of harm to Kane | State: Kane’s positive toenail test shows environmental meth exposure; parental use created safety risk | Adjudication of Kane affirmed — preponderance established definite risk of future harm |
| Failure to adjudicate Carter | County: Carter was exposed to the same parental-risk conditions and should have been adjudicated | Angela: (implicit) Carter’s brief absence from home and detention mitigates present risk | Reversed — juvenile court erred in not adjudicating Carter; State met burden showing risk of future harm |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Interest of Carmelo G., 296 Neb. 805 (2017) (parental liberty interest and limits on delay between ex parte custody and meaningful hearing)
- In re Interest of LeVanta S., 295 Neb. 151 (2016) (appellate review principles in juvenile cases)
- In re Interest of R.G., 238 Neb. 405 (1991) (parents’ due process right to prompt detention hearing after ex parte removal)
- State v. Glazebrook, 282 Neb. 412 (2011) (chain‑of‑custody and foundation for admitting physical/forensic evidence)
- In re Interest of Justine J. et al., 286 Neb. 250 (2013) (standards for juvenile court jurisdiction under § 43-247 and proving risk of future harm)