234 N.C. App. 722
N.C. Ct. App.2014Background
- Respondent appeals an order terminating her parental rights to Nathan in NC Court of Appeals.
- DSS petitioned for termination after Nathan, born 2010, was removed from Respondent due to her arrest for homicide and bank robbery.
- NC trial court exercised temporary emergency jurisdiction under UCCJEA and later terminated rights under §7B-1111(a)(6) and (a)(1).
- Nathan has resided in North Carolina with foster/kinship caregivers since Sept. 2011; no custody orders were entered in any other state.
- Respondent was incarcerated from Sept. 2011 with no imminent release, and three proposed kinship placements were deemed unsuitable by DSS.
- Court concluded NC had home-state, jurisdiction under §50-201(a) to terminate rights; upheld termination under §7B-1111(a)(6).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to terminate | Respondent argues lack of jurisdiction; DSS contends NC home state. | Respondent argues no custody order or home-state proceedings.Nav. | NC court had jurisdiction under 50A-201; NC became Nathan's home state. |
| Whether §7B-1111(a)(6) supports termination | Respondent claims incapacity evidenced by incarceration is insufficient. | Incarceration rendering parent unable to care satisfies §7B-1111(a)(6). | Court properly terminated under §7B-1111(a)(6) given ongoing incarceration and lack of viable care options. |
| Whether lack of appropriate alternate care justified termination | Respondent contends alternatives existed; DSS had concerns about placements. | Three proposed caretakers were unsuitable for various reasons. | Termination upheld because no viable alternate caregiver was available. |
| Whether other grounds were needed given §7B-1111(a)(6) justification | Plaintiff maintains necessary grounds satisfied. | Respondent challenges other grounds beyond §7B-1111(a)(6). | Court need not address other grounds since §7B-1111(a)(6) satisfied. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re N.R.M., 165 N.C. App. 294 (2004) (UCCJEA jurisdiction in termination matters)
- In re E.X.J., 191 N.C. App. 34 (2008) (Temporary emergency jurisdiction proper without explicit factual findings)
- In re P.L.P., 173 N.C. App. 1 (2005) (Incarceration not determinative; need only a reasonable probability of continued incapability)
- In re K.U.-S.G., 208 N.C. App. 128 (2010) (Home-state jurisdiction under §50A-201 when no other state has proper proceedings)
- In re J.M.W., 179 N.C. App. 788 (2006) (One ground sufficient to terminate; other grounds need not be addressed)
- In re H.L.A.D., 184 N.C. App. 381 (2007) (Jurisdiction and emergency bases need not be explicitly proven by findings)