2019 Ohio 3500
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- J.R., born June 1, 2015, has Noonan Syndrome and requires G-tube feedings and frequent medical care; he was twice removed from mother’s care after weight loss/concerns about feeding.
- HCJFS obtained temporary custody; J.R. lived in the same foster home for ~18 months and showed weight gain and stability there.
- Mother visited consistently but missed many medical appointments and did not complete updated assessments/services; father was incarcerated for a time, is a registered sex offender, had later visitation and completed some services but never attended J.R.’s medical appointments or proved stable income.
- Paternal grandmother Rose Stephens sought legal custody but had minimal prior contact with J.R. and no experience administering G-tube feedings.
- HCJFS moved to modify temporary custody to permanent custody; a magistrate granted permanent custody to HCJFS and denied Stephens’s petition; the juvenile court adopted the magistrate’s decision.
- Father appealed, arguing the permanent-custody award was not supported by clear and convincing evidence and was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Father’s Argument | HCJFS/Respondent’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the R.C. 2151.414(B)(1)(d) 12-of-22-months custody condition was met | Father contended the court’s alternative findings under R.C. 2151.414(E) were unsupported (challenging the timeline/factual basis) | HCJFS relied on the undisputed custody timeline showing J.R. had been in agency custody 12+ months of the relevant 22-month period | Court held the 12-of-22 condition was satisfied by clear and convincing evidence, so permanent-custody prerequisites were met |
| Whether permanent custody was in J.R.’s best interest under R.C. 2151.414(D) | Father argued the best-interest finding lacked sufficient evidence and was against the manifest weight (pointing to parent-child bonds and visitation) | HCJFS pointed to J.R.’s medical needs, parents’ failure to attend/participate adequately in medical care/services, father’s offender status/unstable resources, foster placement stability and guardian ad litem’s recommendation | Court held the best-interest determination was supported by clear and convincing evidence and did not constitute a manifest miscarriage of justice; affirmed permanent custody |
Key Cases Cited
- In re N.M.P., 126 N.E.3d 200 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018) (discussing how to compute periods of agency custody for the 12-of-22-months statutory test)