in the Interest of D.R.A. and A.F., Children
374 S.W.3d 528
Tex. App.2012Background
- DFPS received a May 13, 2010 referral alleging neglectful supervision and physical neglect of D.R.A. and A.F. by their mother, Meddie, and relatives; children were removed due to risk of abuse or neglect.
- DFPS filed a petition on June 3, 2010 seeking protection of the child, conservatorship, termination of parental rights, and writ of attachment; emergency orders gave DFPS temporary sole managing conservatorship.
- D’Angelo signed the family service plan on July 28, 2010, committing to parenting classes, housing, evaluation, drug testing, employment, and avoidance of criminal activity.
- D’Angelo participated in a home burglary as get-away driver around September 2010; he was convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment (released August 2011).
- On November 10, 2010, D’Angelo was adjudicated as D.R.A.’s biological father; a bench trial occurred December 15, 2011; final termination order dated January 12, 2012 terminated his parental rights under Texas Family Code §161.001(1)(O) and §161.001(2).
- The trial court’s best-interest analysis considered factors such as stability of placement with Ruthie (who sought to adopt), D’Angelo’s incarceration and crime history, partial compliance with the plan, and the availability of DFPS’s adoption plan for Ruthie.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination under §161.001(1)(O) is supported by evidence of abuse/neglect | D’Angelo argues D.R.A. was not removed for his abuse/neglect | DFPS contends removal and plan compliance support termination under (O) | Yes; evidence supports removal for abuse/neglect and §161.001(1)(O) termination. |
| Whether termination is in D.R.A.’s best interest | D’Angelo asserts potential for reunification and insufficient risks | DFPS argues best interests favor stability and adoption by Ruthie | Yes; termination is in D.R.A.’s best interest. |
Key Cases Cited
- Holick v. Smith, 685 S.W.2d 18 (Tex. 1985) (clear and convincing standard for termination rights)
- In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002) (heightened standard and review for termination)
- In re S.N., 287 S.W.3d 183 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009) (best-interest factors; not all nine required)
- In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (consideration of entire record in best-interest analysis)
- In re U.P., 105 S.W.3d 222 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003) (presumption in favor of preserving parent-child relationship; need for present unfitness)
- Dupree v. Tex. Dep’t of Protective and Regulatory Servs., 907 S.W.2d 81 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1995) (permanence and welfare considerations in termination)