463 P.3d 66
Utah Ct. App.2020Background:
- Mother has a long history of methamphetamine use; one older child (A.M.) had parental rights previously terminated after fetal meth exposure.
- In Feb. 2018 methamphetamine was found in child M.M.’s urine after hospitalization; DCFS removed both children and the juvenile court adjudicated neglect (unchallenged on appeal).
- Court ordered reunification services and a child-and-family plan; Mother largely failed to comply from April–Dec. 2018 and was reincarcerated for probation violations.
- The court terminated reunification services, changed the permanency goal to adoption, and the State filed to terminate Mother’s parental rights.
- After a Nov. 2018 incarceration Mother completed an inpatient treatment program, obtained a GED, and satisfied plan tasks, but completion occurred about four weeks before the termination trial.
- At the June 2019 trial the juvenile court found four statutory grounds for termination (including neglect and unfitness) and concluded termination was in the children’s best interest; this appeal followed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether statutory grounds for termination exist | Mother argued her post-incarceration improvement undermines statutory findings of unfitness/failure of adjustment | State relied on the unchallenged adjudication of past neglect and Mother’s long history of substance abuse | Court held at least one statutory ground (past neglect) was established; appellate court defers to juvenile court on factual weighing |
| 2. Admissibility of evidence that Mother previously lost rights to A.M. (Rule 404(b)) | Mother argued evidence of prior termination was impermissible prior-act evidence under Utah R. Evid. 404(b) | State argued the prior termination was probative of ongoing fitness and best-interest issues, not propensity for a single act | Court held Rule 404(b) did not bar consideration of past parental acts when assessing fitness and best interest; admission was appropriate |
| 3. Whether termination was in the children’s best interest | Mother argued her sustained sobriety and program completion weighed against termination and warranted delay or reinstatement of services | State emphasized Mother’s lengthy substance-abuse history, short period of community sobriety, and children’s stability with foster/adoptive parents | Court held the best-interest determination was a close call but supported by evidence and factual findings; affirmed termination |
Key Cases Cited
- In re B.T.B., 436 P.3d 206 (Utah Ct. App. 2018) (emphasizing holistic best-interest inquiry and cautioning against "automatic" termination based solely on statutory ground)
- Scott v. Scott, 423 P.3d 1275 (Utah 2017) (statutory verb tense matters when determining temporal scope of statutory language)
- Carr v. United States, 560 U.S. 438 (2010) (courts may look to verb tense to ascertain a statute’s temporal reach)
- In re B.R., 171 P.3d 435 (Utah 2007) (standard of review: appellate courts defer to juvenile court factfinding and do not reweigh evidence)
- In re M.L., 965 P.2d 551 (Utah Ct. App. 1998) (past acts may be weighed against current behavior when assessing parental fitness)
- In re J.P., 648 P.2d 1364 (Utah 1982) (best interest of the child is paramount in termination proceedings)
- State v. Thornton, 391 P.3d 1016 (Utah 2017) (trial courts have broad discretion in evidentiary rulings; reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- In re C.T., 438 P.3d 100 (Utah Ct. App. 2018) (appellate deference to juvenile court’s best-interest findings)