Maynard v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2011 Ark. App. 82
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Maynard admitted drug use (Xanax, Valium) without prescription; DHS took emergency custody of J.M. on May 17–18, 2010.
- DHS filed petition for emergency custody after positive drug screens (methamphetamine, opiates/benzoids); J.M. placed in Maynard’s temporary custody under a safety plan.
- Adjudication hearing (July 22, 2010) featured positive drug screens and DHS testimony that Maynard’s drug use affected parenting; J.M. taken into DHS custody.
- Gaskin testified that Maynard should remain with J.M. in a sober state with monitoring, counseling, and random drug testing; Owens originally to accompany Maynard with J.M.
- CASA testified Maynard lacked sufficient income to support J.M., but had a positive relationship with J.M. and attended NA; Owens described as a former caregiver.
- Circuit court found J.M. dependent-neglected by clear and convincing evidence; Maynard appealed challenging sufficiency of evidence; the court affirmed the adjudication.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove dependency-neglected | Maynard argues one failed drug test and lack of substantial risk | DHS argues multiple positive tests and other indicators show risk | Evidence sufficient; adjudication affirmed |
| Whether evidence supports substantial risk of future harm | Maynard contends no substantial risk from single failure | DHS points to two tests and history supporting risk | Court affirmed risk-based finding of neglect |
| Preservation of challenge to judicial notice | Maynard failed to object; argument not preserved | Judicial notice properly used | Argument not reviewable on appeal; preserved issue deemed not raised |
Key Cases Cited
- Bearden v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 344 Ark. 317 (2001) (uncertainty about a parent's drug use not in child's best interests; admissibility context referenced in opinion)
- Carroll v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 148 S.W.3d 780 (2004) (economic and welfare considerations in dependency neglect context)
- Brewer v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Services, 43 S.W.3d 196 (Ark. App. 2001) (parens parla about 'substantial risk' concept in neglect cases)
- McDonald v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 91 S.W.3d 536 (2002) (child protection framework and neglect standards)
- Seago v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 360 S.W.3d 733 (2009) (standard of review for dependency-neglect; defer to trial court on credibility)