2013 Ohio 3104
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- HCDJFS filed a Neglect/Abuse/Dependency complaint for J.R. and M.R. in May 2010; temporary custody granted after stipulations in July 2010.
- Protective supervision began July 2010; case plan established; Father had an oxycodone prescription and drug-screen concerns persisted.
- HCDJFS alleged parents repeatedly failed to submit to drug screens and failed to engage in required services; visits were inconsistent and often problematic.
- Father tested positive for cocaine in November 2012; Mother had separate incarcerations; both parents displayed intermittent engagement in counseling and case plan.
- Children remained in agency custody; motion for permanent custody filed May 21, 2012; evidentiary hearing occurred January 2013; trial court granted permanent custody to HCDJFS on March 1, 2013.
- Trial court found twelve of twenty-two months in temporary custody under R.C. 2151.414(B)(1)(d) and concluded it was in the children’s best interests to grant permanent custody.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best interests support for termination | Father argues insufficient evidence to terminate parental rights. | HCDJFS argues evidence shows lack of parental ability and need for secure placement. | Permanent custody supported by clear and convincing evidence |
| Jurisdiction and service on permanent custody | Father contends lack of personal service on motion voids jurisdiction. | Service to counsel and GAL complied with rules; Father was present with counsel at hearing. | Jurisdiction not lacking; proper notice given |
| Admission of drug-test result | November 7, 2012 cocaine test admitted without proper foundation violated rights. | Testimony admissible to show ongoing drug issues; harmless error beyond substantial rights. | Test result admission upheld; error harmless |
| Due process in denial of visitation modification without hearing | Denial of motion to modify visitation without a hearing violated due process. | Record showed ongoing issues and tentative improvements; court acted within its discretion. | No due process violation; denial sustained |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (Ohio 1990) (parental fundamental rights; standard for termination)
- In re Adkins, 2006-Ohio-431 (5th Dist. 2006) (credibility and weight of evidence in custody determinations)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (1954) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence (clear and convincing framework))
- In re Awkal, 95 Ohio App.3d 309 (8th Dist. 1994) (best-interest framework and deference to trial court)
- In re Calhoun, 2008-Ohio-5458 (5th Dist. 2008) (RTC 12-of-22-month standard and best-interest analysis)
- In re Mauzy Children, 2000 WL 1700073 (5th Dist. 2000) (deference to juvenile court in permanent custody matters)
- In re Summerfield, 2005-Ohio-5523 (5th Dist. 2005) (relapse and ongoing problems as grounds to deny reunification)
- State v. Conway, 2006-Ohio-791 (Ohio Sup. Ct. 2006) (harmless error standard for evidentiary errors)
- Williams v. Dollison, 1980-Ohio St.2d 230 (Ohio Sup. Ct. 1980) (due process rights in custody matters)