In re Interest of Sloane O.
291 Neb. 892
| Neb. | 2015Background
- In August 2014 the State filed an abuse/neglect petition under § 43-247(3)(a) alleging Sloane’s father, Christopher O., used excessive discipline causing injury and failed to provide proper care; DHHS obtained temporary custody excluding the parental home.
- Sloane (the child) testified to physical assaults by Christopher, being restrained with a chain to a couch, and injuries documented by photographs; a DHHS caseworker corroborated statements that Christopher admitted striking Sloane.
- Christopher denied punching Sloane, claimed limited restraint to prevent self-harm, and disputed some statements attributed to him.
- Christopher appealed the adjudication; his appeal contained no assignments of error. The juvenile court adjudicated Sloane and placed her in DHHS custody.
- Sabrina O. (mother) moved for custody, produced Sloane’s birth certificate, and testified she was willing/able to parent; the juvenile court denied her motion citing intervention/party issues and an ongoing probation docket for Sloane.
- Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed Christopher’s appeal (no plain error) but reversed the denial of Sabrina’s custody motion, holding the juvenile court erred in requiring intervention and in overlooking parental preference; remanded for further proceedings with attention to the probation docket.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Christopher forfeited appellate review by failing to include assignments of error | (Christopher pro se) no assignments presented | State urged review on the record or plain error | Court treated lack of assignments as forfeiture but reviewed for plain error and found none; adjudication affirmed |
| Whether Sabrina had to formally intervene to be a party eligible for custody | Sabrina: birth certificate and testimony show she is a parent and thus a party under § 43-245(19) | County: Kiana T. requires formal intervention for putative parents; Sabrina’s reliance on § 43-245(19) premature | Court: Kiana T. distinguishable (putative father there lacked proof); juvenile court erred in requiring intervention — Sabrina is a party |
| Whether juvenile court properly denied Sabrina’s custody motion given parental preference and due process | Sabrina: parental preference presumes parent is proper guardian; State failed to show she was unfit; denial violated due process | State: probation docket and adjudication warranted continued out-of-home placement; concerns about child’s ongoing probation and safety | Court: parental preference applies; State did not present sufficient evidence to overcome Sabrina’s presumptive custody; denial reversed and remanded for updated proceedings, noting probation placement responsibilities remain relevant |
| Whether juvenile court’s adjudication of Sloane should be reviewed on appeal by Sabrina | Sabrina: challenged adjudication (but appeal untimely) | State: procedural timing bars review | Court: appeal from adjudication untimely; Court lacked jurisdiction to review adjudication in Sabrina’s appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Interest of Nicole M., 287 Neb. 685 (Neb. 2014) (standard for de novo appellate review of juvenile cases)
- In re Interest of Jamyia M., 281 Neb. 964 (Neb. 2010) (procedural default and plain error review in juvenile appeals)
- In re Interest of Kiana T., 262 Neb. 60 (Neb. 2001) (putative parent must intervene and establish standing before participating in dependency proceedings)
- In re Interest of Brian B., 268 Neb. 870 (Neb. 2004) (parental custody as a fundamental right and due process balancing)
- In re Interest of Lakota Z. & Jacob H., 282 Neb. 584 (Neb. 2011) (parental preference doctrine applies to adjudicated children)