In Re Jc, 346 S.W.3d 189

J.C. and S.C. were placed in temporary custody of paternal grandmother Rubio and maternal grandparents the Angels after Socorro Angel's murder in 2006.
Covarrubias, Socorro's husband, was detained on immigration charges during the investigations surrounding the murder.
In 2006 the Angels petitioned for managing conservatorship; a merits hearing was delayed while investigations continued.
The trial court ultimately awarded J.C. to joint managing conservatorship of the Angels and Covarrubias (Angels determining J.C.'s primary residence); for S.C., Angels' petition was denied and Covarrubias received sole rights and duties as parent.
By merit time, J.C. had lived with the Angels for over two and a half years; S.C. had not lived with the Angels since early 2007.
Psychologist Carol Stevens recommended J.C. remain with the Angels due to separation anxiety and emotional risk from uprooting; she did not testify to a significant impairment.
The trial judge conducted an in-camera interview with J.C.; the decision relied on testimony and observation, with no written findings in the record; a motion for new trial was denied and no findings were entered.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in naming Angels joint managing conservators for J.C.	Covarrubias argues parental presumption favors Covarrubias as sole parent.	Angels argue they rebutted the presumption through emotional impact and nonparent history of abuse.	Abuse of discretion; revese and remand for Covarrubias as sole managing conservator.
Whether the Angels rebutted the parental presumption under 153.131(a) regarding significant impairment of J.C.'s emotional development.	Angels contend relocation would significantly impair J.C.'s emotional development.	Covarrubias argues evidence does not show significant impairment.	No substantial evidence of significant impairment; presumption not overcome.
Whether there was evidence of a history or pattern of domestic violence by Covarrubias under 153.004(b).	Angels rely on testimony of bruises and fear Covarrubias could harm Socorro to rebut the presumption.	No direct evidence of abuse by Covarrubias; fear alone is insufficient.	Insufficient evidence of a history or pattern of abuse; presumption not overcome.

Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc., 701 S.W.2d 238 (Tex. 1985) (abuse of discretion standard in review of trial court decisions)
In re W.E.R., 669 S.W.2d 716 (Tex. 1984) (need for written findings where required)
Forbes v. Wettman, 598 S.W.2d 231 (Tex. 1980) (transcript of in-camera interview not automatically part of record)
Lewelling v. Lewelling, 796 S.W.2d 164 (Tex. 1990) (close calls in custody disputes favor the parent)
In re De La Pena, 999 S.W.2d 521 (Tex.App.-El Paso 1999) (psycho-social factors in evaluating emotional development)
In re R.T.K., 324 S.W.3d 896 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2010) (standard for rebutting parental presumption; factors reviewed)
In re C.A.M.M., 243 S.W.3d 211 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2007) (evidence sufficiency in conservatorship decisions)
May v. May, 829 S.W.2d 373 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 1992) (properly admitted evidence; judicial notice limitations)
Baltzer v. Medina, 240 S.W.3d 469 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2007) (proof requirements in abuse context)