In re R.L., 2017 Ohio 4271

Mother (biological) of R.L. (b. 5/23/12) lived in an overcrowded West Exchange Street residence with multiple others; utilities were shut off and eviction proceedings had begun.
R.L. had been living with a family friend for ~5–6 weeks, then was left at Mother’s nephew’s (Nephew) home around April 19, 2016 with one change of clothes and no clear plan for duration.
On April 21, 2016 Mother arrived at Nephew’s, appeared disoriented/without jacket or shoes, attempted to take R.L.; Nephew refused due to safety concerns and police were called; police invoked Juv.R. 6 and contacted Summit County Children Services Board (CSB).
CSB held a team decision meeting April 22; Mother said she was being evicted that day and could not identify a safe placement for R.L.; CSB disqualified the only potential friend-placement due to criminal history.
CSB filed a dependency complaint alleging R.C. 2151.04(A) and (C); magistrate and juvenile court adjudicated R.L. dependent under R.C. 2151.04(A) (homeless/destitute), dismissed the (C) allegation; temporary custody awarded to CSB at disposition.
Mother appealed, arguing the adjudication was against the manifest weight of the evidence; this Court affirmed.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	CSB/State’s Argument	Held
Whether adjudication of dependency (R.C. 2151.04(A): homeless/destitute) was against the manifest weight of the evidence	Mother: Record did not show she or child were homeless on the complaint date; no forcible entry and detainer/writ of restitution proved; she had prospective housing (boyfriend secured apartment)	CSB: Evidence showed Mother believed she had no home on April 22, had not arranged an appropriate placement for R.L., and the child arrived at Nephew’s with one set of clothes and no plan	Held: Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence supported finding that R.L. was homeless on April 22, 2016 and adjudication was not against the manifest weight of the evidence
Whether adjudication may properly rely on evidence occurring after the date in the complaint	Mother: Dependency must be proven as of the date alleged in the complaint (April 22, 2016)	CSB: Relied on events around and after the date to show imminent homelessness/unsuitable placement	Held: Court adopts that dependency must be judged by facts as they existed on the date alleged in the complaint; nevertheless, the record showed R.L. was homeless on April 22, 2016 so judgment stands

In re Kronjaeger, 166 Ohio St. 172 (Ohio) (discussed historical rule on timing of adjudicatory fact-finding)
In re Alexander C., 164 Ohio App.3d 540 (6th Dist.) (addresses timing and evidence in juvenile dependency determinations)
In re Sims, 13 Ohio App.3d 37 (12th Dist.) (addresses evidentiary temporal limits in juvenile proceedings)