Katiana Cole v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children
611 S.W.3d 218
Ark. Ct. App.2020Background
- DHS removed SC (b. 2014) and KC (b. 2015) in July 2018 after KC was found with extensive, patterned bruising and a bite mark; parents had not sought medical care or provided an explanation.
- The family had a prior DHS case (March 2016) in which KC, as an infant, suffered an unusual arm fracture; custody was returned to Katie in 2017 and that case closed.
- The boys were adjudicated dependent-neglected; disposition set reunification as primary goal with concurrent adoption.
- Over the case, Katie completed services and complied with orders, but the circuit court found KC’s later injuries remained unexplained and Katie had admitted slapping KC’s face; the court was concerned about recurring risk.
- After a 15-month review, the court changed the goal to adoption and DHS petitioned to terminate parental rights for failure to remedy and aggravated circumstances; the circuit court terminated Katie’s parental rights.
- On appeal Katie conceded the statutory grounds and challenged only whether termination was in the children’s best interest, also arguing (on appeal) that less-restrictive family-placement alternatives were not adequately considered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination was in the children’s best interest (potential-harm prong) | Katie: termination not justified because she complied with services and posed no demonstrated risk | DHS: recurring unexplained abuse of KC, prior return followed by repeat injuries, and unresolved explanations show potential for harm | Court: affirmed — clear-and-convincing evidence supports potential-harm finding and that termination is in best interest |
| Whether the court failed to consider less-restrictive alternatives (relative guardianship/placement) | Katie: court should have used guardianship or placed children with relatives instead of terminating rights | DHS: issue not preserved on appeal; record lacks raising of this argument at termination hearing and transcript of 15-month hearing not in record | Court: not preserved for review; appellate relief denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzalez v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 555 S.W.3d 915 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (standard: termination cases reviewed de novo; two-step analysis)
- Rickman v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 548 S.W.3d 861 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (appellate review defers to circuit court credibility findings)
- Bonner v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 544 S.W.3d 90 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (deference to trial court’s observation of witnesses)
- Scott v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 552 S.W.3d 463 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (past behavior may predict potential future harm)
- Belt v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 603 S.W.3d 203 (Ark. Ct. App. 2020) (evidence supporting statutory grounds may also support best-interest finding)
- Bryant v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 383 S.W.3d 901 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011) (failure to raise issue below or include transcript may forfeit appellate review)