In re M.J.
2013 Ohio 5440
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Appellant K.S., a long-term cocaine user with involvement by Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services (CCDCFS) since 1994, has had multiple children removed previously and three placed in CCDCFS permanent custody.
- M.J. (b. 2009) and C.S. (b. 2010) were placed in CCDCFS custody in 2011 after protective supervision and positive drug tests for mother; temporary custody converted to agency custody July 11, 2011.
- CCDCFS filed for permanent custody on January 26, 2012, citing chronic substance abuse, failure to complete case-plan services, prior involuntary terminations of parental rights, and over two years of agency custody.
- At the April 2013 trial, the mother sought a continuance and an independent hair-follicle test; the court denied both and proceeded. Hair-follicle tests from January and April 2013 were positive for cocaine; urine tests were often negative.
- The guardian ad litem recommended permanent custody for CCDCFS; foster placement was stable and the children were bonded with their foster mother.
- The juvenile court found by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the children could not be returned within a reasonable time due to mother’s chronic chemical dependency and repeated failure to remedy conditions (R.C. 2151.414(B)(1) and (E)), and (2) permanent custody was in the children’s best interest. Appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (K.S.) | Defendant's Argument (CCDCFS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a continuance/independent hair test | Denial prejudiced mother; recent positive hair results warranted time for independent testing | Motion untimely, failed local/Juvenile Rule requirements, prior continuances, results inconsistent with mother's testimony; denial not prejudicial | No abuse of discretion; denial proper given timely rules, prior continuances, and court's finding that an independent test would not alter outcome |
| Whether clear and convincing evidence supported permanent custody under R.C. 2151.414(B)(1) | Mother argued sobriety since Sept. 2012 and progress in treatment | Chronic 26-year addiction, repeated treatment failures, positive recent hair tests, prior involuntary terminations of parental rights, children in custody >2 years | Clear and convincing evidence supported findings that children could not/should not be placed with mother within a reasonable time (R.C. 2151.414(B)(1)) |
| Whether award of permanent custody was in children’s best interest (R.C. 2151.414(D)) | Mother argued bonding and visitation, ability to reunify | Children bonded with foster mother, stable placement, mother's ongoing substance/mental-health concerns and inability to provide legally secure placement | Court properly found permanent custody was in children’s best interest based on interactions, custodial history, need for legally secure placement |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Unger, 67 Ohio St.2d 65 (Ohio 1981) (factors for evaluating continuance requests and balancing docket control against prejudice)
- In re C.F., 113 Ohio St.3d 73 (Ohio 2007) (two-prong test for terminating parental rights: statutory grounds and best interest)
- In re William S., 75 Ohio St.3d 95 (Ohio 1996) (establishing that one statutory ground is sufficient to support permanent-custody finding)