In re J.D., 2017 Ohio 4229

In May 2015 Fayette County Children Services removed four children (ages ~5–12) from Mother after evidence of heroin use, visible track marks, Mother's refusal to allow agency into home, and children showing signs of self-care. Temporary custody to the agency followed; dependency was adjudicated in July 2015 (Mother did not appeal).
The agency adopted a reunification case plan (mental health counseling, inpatient drug treatment, stable housing, parenting classes); Mother did not sign the plan and had only partial compliance.
Mother had intermittent contact and visitation: regular visits began November 2015 but stopped after February 2016; visits were briefly reinstated in November 2016 but she did not attend. Mother reported inpatient treatment and claimed sobriety at hearing.
Agency moved for permanent custody in August 2016; a January 2017 hearing was held after the court denied Mother’s last-minute continuance request. Guardian ad litem recommended permanent custody to the agency.
The juvenile court granted permanent custody to the agency, finding (inter alia) the children had been in agency temporary custody for at least 12 of 22 months, parents had effectively abandoned the children, and permanent custody was in the children’s best interests. Mother appealed.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	Agency’s Argument	Held
Whether dependency/neglect finding was erroneous	Mother: children were safe with neighbors; insufficient evidence of dependency/neglect	Agency: dependency was adjudicated after hearing; neglect counts dismissed	Court: dependency finding was final and unappealed; res judicata bars challenge (overruled error claim)
Whether denial of continuance violated due process	Mother: needed brief continuance to gather evidence of compliance with case plan; counsel unprepared	Agency: Mother had months since filing to prepare; she contributed to delay and failed to cooperate	Court: denial was within discretion; Mother not prejudiced; no due process violation (assignment overruled)
Whether permanent custody was supported by clear and convincing evidence	Mother: children could be reunified in reasonable time; best-interest finding unsupported	Agency: children in custody >12 of 22 months; parents abandoned children; children need legally secure placement	Court: statutory 12-of-22-months prong met; best-interest factors supported permanent custody (assignment overruled)

Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (state must prove termination standards by clear and convincing evidence before parental rights are terminated)
In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (Ohio 1990) (adjudication of dependency followed by temporary custody is a final appealable order)
State v. Unger, 67 Ohio St.2d 65 (Ohio 1981) (factors governing trial-court discretion to grant or deny continuances)