In re J.B.
2013 Ohio 1704
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- In early 2009, CCDCFS removed J.B. from appellant S.B.’s care after a dangerous incident and deplorable living conditions at a flop house.
- J.B. and her cousin were placed in a foster home where they have remained since August 2009.
- The agency filed for permanent custody on January 28, 2011, after J.B. had been in temporary custody for over 12 months.
- The trial spanned three days across November 2011, January 2012, and March 2012, with testimony from social workers, the foster mother, relatives, and the GAL.
- The trial court ultimately granted permanent custody to CCDCFS, and the dissenting judge urged legal custody to the great-grandmother with agency supervision.
- J.B. has significant medical needs and had lived in a stable foster home for over two years by the time of trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the first prong of R.C. 2151.414(B)(1) was satisfied | S.B. argues reunification should be explored | CCDCFS contends 12 of 22 months in agency custody supports permanent custody | Yes; the 12/22 months factor was satisfied. |
| Whether the grant of permanent custody is in the child’s best interest | S.B. asserts relative placement could satisfy best interests | CCDCFS contends best interests require permanent custody due to safety and stability concerns | Yes; permanent custody to CCDCFS supported by clear and convincing evidence. |
| Whether admission of Officer Maxel’s testimony and Sanetta’s conviction was proper | S.B. challenges admissibility as improper character evidence | CCDCFS argues evidence is admissible for context and other purposes | Yes; admission deemed harmless error. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re C.W., 104 Ohio St.3d 163 (2004-Ohio-6411) (12 of 22 months rule governs when in agency custody for 12 months)
- In re D.A., 8th Dist. No. 95188 (2010-Ohio-5618) (best interest analysis; deference to trial court’s custody ruling)
- In re T.S., 8th Dist. Nos. 86084, 86109, 86110 (2005-Ohio-6633) (guardianship considerations in custody determinations)
- In re Gill, 2002-Ohio-3242 (2002-Ohio-3242) (termination of parental rights as last resort; best interests focus)
- In re C.C., 187 Ohio App.3d 365 (2010-Ohio-780) (substantial compliance not determinative of reunification)