2015 Ohio 4164
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Father is biological father of multiple children; this appeal concerns termination of his parental rights to two sons (born 2004 and 2006).
- CSB first became involved in 2009; children were adjudicated dependent and later placed in Father’s custody for a time after he completed some services.
- In 2013 CSB removed the children from Father’s home following disclosures of lack of basic needs, exposure to marijuana, and domestic violence between Father and his paramour; all six children were adjudicated dependent.
- Case plan required Father to obtain stable housing/employment, complete anger-management and parenting services, and demonstrate appropriate supervision; Father largely failed to comply and repeatedly denied responsibility for abuse allegations.
- CSB moved for permanent custody of the two children; the juvenile court found by clear and convincing evidence (1) the children could not or should not be returned to Father (R.C. 2151.414(E)) and (2) permanent custody was in their best interests (R.C. 2151.414(D)).
- Father appealed raising six assignments of error challenging jurisdiction, several evidentiary rulings, notice of expert testimony, and the sufficiency/weight of the evidence supporting permanent custody.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (CSB) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appellate jurisdiction | Permanent custody order is final and appealable | Trial court didn’t issue final appealable order at adjudication/disposition so appellate court lacks jurisdiction | Appellate court has jurisdiction; permanent custody order is final and appealable; prior finality of adjudication/disposition irrelevant |
| Admission of criminal journal entries | Entries show Father’s criminal history relevant to risk/fitness | Entries not admissible under Crim.R. 32(C); CSB didn’t prove entries referred to this Father | Any error harmless; only one recent case tied to Father and others didn’t affect outcome; no prejudice shown |
| Admission of children’s psychological records | Records admissible; counselors testified and files were complete for clinical purposes | Records not properly authenticated / incomplete (missing nonclinical items/drawings) — Evidence Rule 106 violation | No reversible error; counselor testimony furnished substance; Father failed to show prejudice or that omitted items were required or relevant |
| Caseworker testimony on children’s wishes / best interests | Caseworker and guardian ad litem agreed children opposed return; testimony assisted factfinder | Caseworker not authorized to present opinions on best interest/wishes; hearsay concerns | Even if improper, testimony didn’t conflict with guardian ad litem; no prejudice; not reversible error |
| Designation/notice of expert witness | CSB disclosed witness; witness qualified | Father lacked prior notice to prepare for expert designation; prejudiced cross-examination | Father did not request continuance or show prejudice; no reversible or plain error |
| Sufficiency/weight of evidence for permanent custody | Clear and convincing evidence Father failed to remedy conditions (anger, housing, employment) and permanent custody served children’s best interests | Father complied in part previously, disputes allegations of violence, argues insufficient evidence and weight against termination | Evidence supported findings under R.C. 2151.414(E) and (D): Father failed to remedy conditions, ongoing domestic violence and instability, children needed permanence; termination affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Masters, 165 Ohio St. 503 (Ohio 1956) (permanent custody orders are final and appealable)
- In re William S., 75 Ohio St.3d 95 (Ohio 1996) (permanent custody requires clear and convincing proof of the statutory prongs)