in the Interest of K.D., C.D., and C.F., III, Children
06-17-00068-CV
| Tex. App. | Nov 17, 2017Background
- Mother had a long history of drug use and repeated domestic-violence relationships; her parental rights to three children (K.D., C.D., C.F., III) were terminated after a jury trial brought by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services.
- Evidence included Mother’s positive drug tests (methamphetamine and marijuana), children’s positive drug-exposure tests (one child positive for multiple drugs), and repeated exposure of the children to an abusive partner (C.F., Jr.), who also had a long methamphetamine addiction and criminal convictions.
- Court-ordered reunification services required psychological evaluation, substance-abuse assessment, counseling (including domestic-violence counseling), drug testing, parenting classes, and child-support payments; Mother repeatedly failed to complete ordered services, continued to test positive for drugs, refused prescribed psychiatric medications, and moved residences frequently.
- Children had been removed in March 2016 and were in foster care; foster families provided stable homes, extracurricular activities, and the foster parents who cared for the children sought to adopt all three together.
- Trial court found multiple statutory grounds for termination (including §161.001(b)(1)(E)) and that termination was in the children’s best interests; Mother appealed arguing factual and legal insufficiency on multiple statutory grounds, insufficiency on best-interest, and jury-charge error related to broad-form questions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for statutory predicate grounds (D, E, M, N, O, P) | Mother: evidence was insufficient (factually and legally) to support termination on listed grounds | State/Dept: evidence of long-term drug use, children’s drug exposure, and repeated exposure to domestic violence supported at least one predicate ground (E) | Affirmed: evidence was factually sufficient to support termination under §161.001(b)(1)(E) |
| Sufficiency of evidence that termination was in children’s best interests | Mother: termination not shown to be in children’s best interests | State/Dept: Mother’s instability, continued drug use, failure to complete services, exposure to violence, and children’s stable foster placements support best-interest finding | Affirmed: clear-and-convincing evidence supported best-interest finding |
| Effect of multiple predicate findings (only one required) | Mother: challenged multiple grounds individually | State/Dept: only one valid statutory ground is necessary to support termination when best interest is proven | Court relied on single sufficient ground (E); affirmed termination |
| Jury-charge/broad-form submission error and preservation | Mother: broad-form question combined grounds and best interest, risking nonunanimous verdict and violating due process | State/Dept: no objection at trial; issue unpreserved for appeal | Not preserved: Mother failed to timely object; appellate review denied on this claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Holick v. Smith, 685 S.W.2d 18 (Tex. 1985) (parental rights are constitutional and termination statutes strictly construed in favor of parent)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (parents have fundamental right to make decisions concerning care and custody of children)
- In re A.B., 437 S.W.3d 498 (Tex. 2014) (clear-and-convincing standard and requirement for exacting appellate review in termination cases)
- In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (standard for factual-sufficiency review in parental-rights termination cases)
- Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976) (factors to consider in best-interest analysis)
- In re J.P.B., 180 S.W.3d 570 (Tex. 2005) (legal-sufficiency review standard: view evidence in the light most favorable to findings)