In the Interest of J.R.
2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1049
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Parents married in 2008 and are the natural parents of four children: J.R. (b. 2003), D.R. (b. 2004), W.R. (b. 2006), K.R. (b. 2006).
- DSS/Children’s Division took emergency custody in 2008 after an unsanitary home with filth, pests, and child health issues.
- The court authorized a Consent Judgment, and Parents waived counsel while agreeing to service plans and child support obligations.
- Parents’ homes were unstable; multiple evictions and housing instability coincided with limited service plan progress.
- A TPR petition was filed in December 2009; after hearings, the court terminated parental rights in October 2010, which Parents challenged on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was counsel required from the outset? | Parents waived; court not required to appoint. | Court failed to appoint counsel when waiver occurred; error. | Point I denied. |
| Did denial of Father’s continuance request abuse discretion? | Continuance allowed participation; court abused discretion. | Continuance denied appropriately; progress shown. | Point II granted. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re K.A.W., 133 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. banc 2004) (strictly construed TPR; preserve parent-child relationship)
- In re C.F., 340 S.W.3d 296 (Mo.App. E.D.2011) (counsel rights and due process in TPR)
- In re L.E.C., 182 S.W.3d 680 (Mo.App. W.D.2006) (waiver of counsel can relieve court obligation to appoint counsel)
- In re J.S.W., 295 S.W.3d 877 (Mo.App. E.D.2009) (affirmative waiver requirement for counsel)
- In re C.N.G., 109 S.W.3d 702 (Mo.App. W.D.2003) (service-plan compliance as factor, not sole ground for termination)