In re J.M.
2016 Ohio 7306
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- J.M., born 2009, was placed in Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services (CCDCFS) custody after domestic-violence incidents in the home in December 2012; emergency custody awarded December 5, 2012 and preadjudicatory custody thereafter.
- Mother admitted to domestic violence, mental-health issues, and unstable housing; GAL reported prior molestation of J.M. by maternal grandfather and J.M.’s resulting behavioral/sexualized symptoms.
- Father (R.C.) had limited contact with J.M.: no consistent visitation from age 2 until about age 5, a criminal history including domestic-violence convictions, child-support arrearages, and recent, undocumented, part-time employment; he resided with fiancée K.Z. and multiple children in a home lacking a separate bedroom for J.M.
- CCDCFS moved for permanent custody after J.M. had been in agency custody for over 12 of 22 consecutive months; foster caregiver (A.C.) provided a structured, therapeutic home where J.M. had made measurable progress.
- Father sought legal custody for himself and alternatively for K.Z.; GAL and CCDCFS opposed both as unsuitable. Trial court terminated parental rights and awarded permanent custody to CCDCFS; father appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Father's Argument | CCDCFS / Trial Court Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether child needed independent counsel separate from GAL | Father: J.M.’s wishes (wanting to return to mother) conflicted with GAL; court should appoint separate counsel | GAL and court: child was five and immature; GAL could represent child’s interests and wishes without conflict | Court: No abuse of discretion; child lacked maturity to require independent counsel |
| Whether trial court abused discretion denying legal custody to father | Father: He can provide stable placement; legal custody is less drastic than terminating rights | Agency: Father’s record, instability, lack of space, arrears, and limited parenting demonstrated unsuitability | Court: Denial of father’s legal custody motion affirmed; evidence supported unsuitability |
| Whether trial court abused discretion denying legal custody to K.Z. | Father: K.Z. is suitable and supported placement; would avoid need for termination | Agency: K.Z. had uneven contact, criminal history, limited knowledge of child’s needs, and household constraints | Court: Denial affirmed; evidence supported concerns about K.Z.’s capacity and potential sham placement |
| Whether clear and convincing evidence supported permanent custody to CCDCFS | Father: J.M. did not want parental rights to terminate; foster mother’s age and adoptive intent questioned; father can care for child | Agency: J.M. in custody >12 of 22 months; parents cannot provide safe, stable, therapeutic placement; foster home meets child’s needs | Court: Clear and convincing evidence supported termination and permanent custody to CCDCFS; judgment not against manifest weight |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Williams, 805 N.E.2d 1110 (Ohio 2004) (courts decide on case-by-case need for independent counsel for child)
- In re Janie M., 723 N.E.2d 191 (Ohio App. 1999) (GAL may also act as counsel absent conflict)
- In re Smith, 601 N.E.2d 45 (Ohio App. 1992) (same principle on GAL doubling as counsel)
- In re Schaefer, 857 N.E.2d 532 (Ohio 2006) (permanent-custody analysis requires choosing the best option for the child; legal custody availability is not dispositive)
- Cross v. Ledford, 120 N.E.2d 118 (Ohio 1954) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)