In re Kyeshon J.
153 A.3d 499
| R.I. | 2017Background
- Petitioners Sandra and Gorvey Armand filed adoption petitions so Gorvey could adopt Kyeshon (b.1999) and Jarell (b.2000); respondent father Kai Jackson refused to consent.
- Petitioners moved to terminate respondent’s parental rights under G.L. 1956 § 15-7-7(a), and a Family Court trial occurred over multiple days in 2014.
- Trial evidence established long periods of noncontact and no child support from respondent; the Family Court found last contact was November 9, 2011, and little financial or emotional support thereafter.
- Both children and the mother testified that Gorvey served as the children’s father-figure for many years and that termination/adoption would serve the children’s interests.
- The Family Court found respondent unfit and, by clear and convincing evidence, that he had abandoned the children (six-month statutory period), and terminated his parental rights; respondent appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by finding respondent unfit when unfitness was not pleaded | Petitioners relied on evidence of abandonment and unfitness introduced at trial; no prejudice shown by admitting such evidence | Jackson argued unfitness was not alleged in the petition and therefore should not have been found | Waived on appeal — respondent failed to object at trial; raise-or-waive rule applies |
| Whether respondent had financial ability to support children during incarceration | Petitioners argued respondent had opportunities/resources at times he was not incarcerated but nonetheless failed to provide consistent support | Jackson contended he lacked ability while incarcerated and denied regular support claims | Court upheld finding respondent failed to provide consistent financial support, relying on trial findings and record |
| Whether termination served children’s best interests | Petitioners and the children argued adoption by Gorvey would provide stability and meet children’s needs | Jackson argued termination was not warranted given limited contacts at times | Court found termination served best interests: children desired adoption and Gorvey acted as stable father-figure |
| Whether abandonment under §15-7-7(a)(4) was established | Petitioners argued lack of communication/contact over statutory period constituted prima facie abandonment | Jackson argued contacts and attempts through others rebut abandonment | Court held there was clear and convincing evidence of abandonment (lack of contact over six months); respondent failed to rebut prima facie case |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Jake G., 126 A.3d 450 (R.I. 2015) (standard of review and requirement of clear and convincing evidence to terminate parental rights)
- In re Jah-nell B., 116 A.3d 784 (R.I. 2015) (deference to Family Court factual findings)
- In re Tory S., 988 A.2d 151 (R.I. 2010) (best interests of the child controls adoption/termination decisions)
- In re DeKarri P., 787 A.2d 1170 (R.I. 2001) (incarcerated parent’s failure to contact can constitute abandonment)
- In re Serenity K., 891 A.2d 881 (R.I. 2006) (incarceration does not excuse responsibility to maintain substantial contact)