In Re: J.E., 17-0686

Background

DHHR filed abuse and neglect petition (Oct 2016) alleging father G.E. committed domestic violence (including threats with a knife) in the child's presence and engaged in long‑term substance abuse and criminal behavior that caused neglect/emotional harm.
Father was absent from an early preliminary hearing; at adjudicatory hearing (Feb 2017) he stipulated to the petition, admitted longstanding drug use (including methamphetamine), and was adjudicated an abusing parent.
Father requested a post‑adjudicatory improvement period but asked that it be held in abeyance due to incarceration; the court denied the motion. Father was released, then re‑incarcerated after absconding from community corrections.
At dispositional hearing (June 2017) father was represented by counsel but was not transported from jail because the court feared he might abscond and due to threatening social‑media posts; he attended only one hearing and one MDT meeting by phone.
The circuit court found no reasonable likelihood the father could correct the conditions of abuse/neglect, terminated his parental rights (July 3, 2017), and found termination in the child’s best interest; mother’s rights remained intact pending her improvement period and adoption was the concurrent permanency plan.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether termination was improper without using a less‑restrictive alternative	Father: addiction caused the abuse; he should have been given rehabilitative alternatives rather than termination	DHHR/Circuit Court: father did not participate in rehabilitative efforts, absented himself, and presented no evidence of having remedied conditions	Court: affirmed termination—no reasonable likelihood conditions could be corrected and termination was necessary for child’s welfare
Whether denial of transport to dispositional hearing violated due process	Father: not being transported denied his opportunity to be heard about social‑media posts and supervision noncompliance	DHHR/Circuit Court: custody of transportation is discretionary; father was represented by counsel and posed flight/threat concerns	Court: no abuse of discretion in declining transport; due process preserved by counsel representation
Whether father’s lack of participation in proceedings foreclosed improvement	Father: blamed addiction but did not show efforts to remedy it	DHHR: father largely failed to participate or follow case plan; absconded from supervision	Court: lack of response to rehabilitative efforts supports finding of no reasonable likelihood of correction
Court’s duty re: permanency after termination	N/A (reminder by Court)	N/A	Court: remanded no action but reminded lower court of rules requiring permanency hearings every 3 months and permanent placement within 12 months, with adoption prioritized when appropriate

Key Cases Cited

In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (W. Va. 1996) (standard of review for circuit court factual findings in abuse/neglect cases)
In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (W. Va. 2011) (affirming standards for reviewing abuse/neglect proceedings)
In re R.J.M., 164 W.Va. 496, 266 S.E.2d 114 (W. Va. 1980) (termination may be used without less‑restrictive alternatives when no reasonable likelihood of correction exists)
In re Kristin Y., 227 W.Va. 558, 712 S.E.2d 55 (W. Va. 2011) (application of statutory termination standards)
State ex rel. Jeanette H. v. Pancake, 207 W.Va. 154, 529 S.E.2d 865 (W. Va. 2000) (discretionary authority to permit incarcerated parent to attend dispositional hearing)
State v. Michael M., 202 W.Va. 350, 504 S.E.2d 177 (W. Va. 1998) (priority for securing adoptive home in permanent placement decisions)
James M. v. Maynard, 185 W.Va. 648, 408 S.E.2d 400 (W. Va. 1991) (guardian ad litem’s role continues until child placed in a permanent home)