In Re: M.D. and S.D., 17-0665

DHHR filed abuse-and-neglect petition (Nov 2016) after petitioner D.D. allegedly used/injected suboxone in front of his wife and children during a trip to Pittsburgh; police found needles, knives, opium, and cocaine within the children’s reach.
An in-home safety plan was put in place; petitioner failed to comply with the plan and did not participate in DHHR meetings or submit to drug screening.
Petitioner missed the adjudicatory hearing (Feb 2017); court adjudicated him an abusing parent based on drug use in children's presence and noncompliance with the safety plan.
Petitioner first appeared at the dispositional stage (Apr–May 2017); DHHR presented positive drug tests for methamphetamines, THC, and amphetamines and evidence of petitioner’s lack of responsibility and poor attitude.
Petitioner requested an improvement period; DHHR and the guardian opposed, and the circuit court denied the improvement period, found no reasonable likelihood conditions could be corrected, and terminated petitioner’s parental rights (June 12, 2017).
Mother voluntarily relinquished parental rights; children placed with maternal grandparents with a plan for adoption.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether circuit court erred in terminating D.D.’s parental rights	D.D. contended termination was erroneous (brief raised but inadequately supported)	DHHR and guardian argued evidence showed ongoing substance abuse, noncompliance, and unlikelihood of correction; sought termination	Affirmed: court found termination appropriate given drug use, noncompliance, positive tests, and lack of likelihood of correction; petitioner’s brief inadequately supported so issues not considered on appeal
Whether D.D. was entitled to an improvement period	D.D. moved for an improvement period at disposition	DHHR and guardian opposed, citing positive drug tests and lack of responsibility	Denied: court found insufficient evidence D.D. would fully participate or benefit from an improvement period

In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (W. Va. 1996) (standard for reviewing circuit-court findings in bench trials)
In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (W. Va. 2011) (restating standard of review for abuse-and-neglect appeals)
State v. Kaufman, 227 W.Va. 537, 711 S.E.2d 607 (W. Va. 2011) (issues not supported by authority may be disregarded on appeal)
State v. LaRock, 196 W.Va. 294, 470 S.E.2d 613 (W. Va. 1996) (briefing requirements and appellate standards)
State Dep’t of Health v. Robert Morris N., 195 W.Va. 759, 466 S.E.2d 827 (W. Va. 1995) (court will not hunt for arguments buried in briefs)
United States v. Dunkel, 927 F.2d 955 (7th Cir. 1991) (appellate courts are not obligated to construct arguments for parties)