in the Interest of A.S., a Child
06-16-00039-CV
| Tex. App. | Oct 18, 2016Background
- DFPS investigated allegations of sexual inappropriate conduct toward A.S. and his sibling by Adelle, and Smith was implicated through family contacts in 2015.
- Smith had a prior conviction and deferred adjudication for methamphetamine possession, with subsequent revocation and a six-year prison sentence in 2015.
- DFPS filed an original petition July 9, 2015 seeking termination of parental rights and conservatorship.
- The trial court held a hearing April 14, 2016 and found clear and convincing evidence supporting termination on multiple grounds and that termination was in A.S.’s best interest.
- Smith requested a continuance/extending the docket; the trial court denied the request and the court proceeded to judgment.
- The Texas Court of Appeals upheld the denial of extension and affirmed termination based on Section 161.001(b)(1)(Q) and Holley best-interest factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Extension of case on docket—deferment, extraordinary circumstances | Smith contends Section 263.401 favors parents; court should extend. | Smith failed to show extraordinary circumstances or best interest; extension improper. | Denied; no abuse of discretion. |
| Sufficiency to terminate under 161.001(b)(1)(Q) | Parole likelihood undermines two-year confinement requirement. | Parole possibility is speculative; grounds existed regardless. | Sufficient legal and factual basis under Q. |
| Best interests—Holley factors | Smith could provide future stability and care; factors favor reunification. | Placement family provides stability; past conduct indicates risk; Holley factors weigh against Smith. | Termination in A.S.’s best interest based on Holley factors. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002) (clear and convincing standard; heightened review for termination)
- In re E.N.C., 384 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. 2012) (need not prove all grounds; single ground with best interest suffices)
- In re A.V., 113 S.W.3d 355 (Tex. 2003) (one ground plus best interest supports termination)
- Holick v. Smith, 685 S.W.2d 18 (Tex. 1985) (Holley factors guide best-interest analysis)