2020 Ohio 1085
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Mother is the natural parent of T.J. (born 2002). After T.J. reported past abuse and suicidal ideation at school, HCJFS obtained emergency custody; juvenile court later adjudicated T.J. abused and neglected and gave HCJFS temporary custody.
- Mother completed some services (parenting classes, individual therapy) but largely failed to complete family therapy, sustained visitation, or meaningfully participate in treatment-team meetings; her visits were suspended after they aggravated T.J.
- While in HCJFS custody, T.J. was placed in multiple residential/group homes and foster placements, hospitalized repeatedly for suicidal (and occasionally homicidal) ideation, and diagnosed with PTSD, depressive disorder, and pragmatic language disorder.
- HCJFS moved for permanent custody after ~19 months in care; the juvenile court held hearings in Aug. and Sept. 2019 and granted permanent custody to HCJFS in Nov. 2019.
- Mother appealed, raising four assignments of error: denial of a continuance, deprivation of right to counsel, insufficient consideration of best-interest factors, and insufficient clear-and-convincing evidence to award permanent custody.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (HCJFS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of continuance | Trial counsel/extra time needed after supplemental case plan/discovery; continuance warranted | Court properly weighed Ungar factors; discovery gave 21 days' notice; mother caused delay via numerous filings; witnesses scheduled | Denial not an abuse of discretion; continuance properly denied |
| Right to counsel | Mother was deprived of counsel at all stages | Multiple counsel were appointed and withdrew; court warned mother and conducted colloquy; mother elected pro se representation | Mother knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily waived counsel; no deprivation |
| Best-interest analysis (failure to consider factors) | Juvenile court cited only one R.C. 2151.414(D)(1) factor and didn’t analyze others | Court’s findings addressed each statutory concern even if not recited verbatim; trial-level discussion sufficient for review | Court sufficiently considered mandatory best-interest factors; no reversible error |
| Sufficiency of evidence for permanent custody | HCJFS failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that permanent custody was in T.J.’s best interest | Evidence showed mother frustrated treatment, visits harmed T.J., no viable family placement, T.J. desired permanency with HCJFS, and T.J. needed a legally secure placement | Clear and convincing evidence supported grant of permanent custody to HCJFS |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ungar, 423 N.E.2d 1078 (Ohio 1981) (continuance denial reviewed for abuse of discretion; balancing factors)
- In re R.K., 95 N.E.3d 394 (Ohio 2018) (parents have right to counsel in termination cases)
- In re K.T. II, 121 N.E.3d 847 (Ohio 2018) (trial court not required to recite every statutory best-interest factor if record shows consideration)