In re S. Children
2012 Ohio 6265
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- JFS filed May 23, 2012 a dependency/neglect complaint seeking permanent custody of two newborns, T.S. and L.S., after shelter care and stipulation to dependency.
- Mother is not a party to the appeal but is married to Father and resides with him.
- JFS history with the family dates to 2006, including prior cases culminating in permanent custody determinations against Father in 2010 and 2011.
- Father has a criminal history, is a Tier II sex offender in treatment, and had stopped attending his program for financial reasons, with no re-enrollment.
- Trial court found both parents had not shown change in circumstances precluding permanent custody and noted the mother's mental illness could risk unsafe parenting; foster parents are bonded with the children and seeking adoption.
- The juvenile court granted permanent custody to JFS on August 16, 2012; Father appeals on three asserted errors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court erred by granting permanent custody without a specific finding on reasonable efforts | Father argues R.C. 2151.419 requires a finding on reasonable efforts. | JFS contends explicit finding was unnecessary given the facts and prior holdings. | Overruled; substantial evidence supports without explicit finding. |
| Whether the court should have required reasonable efforts to reunite under 2151.419 | Father asserts the statute requires reasonable reunification efforts. | JFS argues discretionary return decisions apply under 2151.419(A)(3). | Overruled; court acted within discretion not to require reunification efforts. |
| Whether the best interests finding supporting permanent custody is against the manifest weight or sufficiency of the evidence | Father challenges the sufficiency/weight of the evidence for permanent custody. | JFS and guardian ad litem supported permanent custody for adoption. | Not against the manifest weight or insufficient; evidence supports best interests. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Brown, 2008-Ohio-3655 (5th Dist. 2008) (omission of a specific findings on reasonable efforts not reversible where facts support it)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio Supreme Court 2012) (distinguishes weight vs. sufficiency; clear and convincing standard in custody cases)
- In re Estate of Haynes, 25 Ohio St.3d 101 (Ohio Supreme Court 1986) (defines clear and convincing standard)
- State v. Schiebel, 55 Ohio St.3d 71 (Ohio Supreme Court 1990) (defines clear and convincing standard)
- Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio Supreme Court 1997) (weight vs. sufficiency; standard for evidentiary sufficiency)