In re T.G.
2015 Ohio 5330
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Two children, T.G. and S.G., were placed in emergency custody of Athens County Children Services (ACCS) on Oct. 1, 2013, after concerns including the mother A.M.’s criminal charges for sexual offenses involving another child in the household and the health/condition of J.G., the man believed to be their father.
- DNA showed J.G. was not the biological father; A.M. was later convicted of multiple crimes (including compelling prostitution involving a child from the household) and remained incarcerated until 2018.
- Children were in temporary custody of ACCS from late 2013; ACCS moved for permanent custody on Oct. 10, 2014. The children had regular visitation with appellants C.M. (maternal grandfather) and D.M. (step-grandmother), who sought legal custody/adoption.
- A permanency hearing occurred in 2015; the trial court awarded permanent custody to ACCS and denied appellants’ motion for legal custody. Appellants appealed pro se but did not provide a transcript of the permanency hearing.
- The appellate court upheld the trial court’s decision, concluding appellants failed to preserve an adequate record and, on the merits (presuming validity of lower-court proceedings), permanent custody was supported by statutory factors (mother’s conviction and incarceration) and the children’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ACCS permanent custody award was erroneous | Appellants (C.M./D.M.) argued they should have been awarded legal custody or allowed to adopt as suitable relatives | ACCS argued permanent custody was warranted because children could not/should not be returned to mother and permanent custody served children’s best interests | Affirmed: permanent custody to ACCS was not against manifest weight; statutory factors (mother’s conviction and incarceration) and best-interest findings supported award |
| Effect of missing transcript on appellate review | Appellants contended errors in trial court decision | Appellee argued record was incomplete; App.R. 9(B) requires transcript; absence precludes full review | Appellate court presumed validity of trial court proceedings per Knapp and declined to overturn absent transcript |
| Whether trial court had to consider relative placement/require reasonable-efforts finding at permanency hearing | Appellants argued relatives should have priority and court should have found placement with them appropriate | ACCS/trial court noted R.C. 2151.419 reasonable-efforts requirement does not apply to permanent-custody motions; court has discretion regarding relative placement | Held: No statutory requirement to exhaust relative-placement or to make a reasonable-efforts finding at permanent-custody hearing; court may grant permanency to agency if best interests support it |
| Whether best-interest factors supported permanent custody and denial of legal custody | Appellants argued bonding and kinship favored them | Trial court found children bonded to foster parents, mother–child relationship unhealthy, no identified father, and adoption via ACCS provided legally secure placement; concerns that legal custody to relatives could permit mother to re-enter children’s lives | Held: Trial court’s R.C. 2151.414(D) best-interest findings (interaction, wishes, history, need for legally secure placement) supported award of permanent custody and denial of legal custody |
Key Cases Cited
- Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories, 61 Ohio St.2d 197 (court will presume validity of lower-court proceedings when necessary transcript portions are omitted)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (standard for reviewing whether judgment is against manifest weight of the evidence)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (parents have fundamental liberty interest in custody; state may terminate when child’s best interest demands)
- In re K.H., 119 Ohio St.3d 538 (permanent-custody determinations must be supported by clear and convincing evidence)
- In re Schaefer, 111 Ohio St.3d 498 (juvenile court need not find termination is the only option nor must it prove no suitable relative exists before granting permanent custody)
- Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (deference to trial court credibility findings in custody-related proceedings)