McDaniel v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
579 S.W.3d 184
Ark. Ct. App.2019Background
- Child L.G. born May 23, 2018; meconium positive for methamphetamine and mother Leslie McDaniel admitted recent meth use.
- DHS required a home study before releasing baby; Leslie left hospital, provided contact information, and then was largely unreachable by DHS (no stable housing or successful contact).
- DHS took emergency custody on May 31, 2018; court ordered services (drug screens, parenting classes, psychological evaluation, housing/employment stability).
- Leslie failed to comply with ordered services, missed visits, tested positive for methamphetamine at times or refused screens, and did not appear at the termination hearing.
- Leslie previously had parental rights involuntarily terminated as to an older child (K.M.); that terminating order was admitted at the termination hearing.
- Trial court found clear-and-convincing evidence of statutory grounds (abandonment; aggravated circumstances/low likelihood of successful reunification; prior involuntary termination as to a sibling) and that termination was in L.G.’s best interest; appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statutory grounds supported termination | DHS: at least one ground exists (abandonment, aggravated circumstances, prior involuntary termination of sibling) | Leslie: no preserved meritorious challenge (no pro se points; counsel filed no-merit brief) | Court: affirmed; prior involuntary termination of sibling conclusively established statutory ground under § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(ix)(a)(4) |
| Whether termination was supported by clear-and-convincing evidence | DHS: evidence of noncompliance, instability, drug use, lack of visitation, and prior termination supports finding | Leslie: did not present arguments or appear to contest evidence at hearing | Court: not clearly erroneous; evidence supported statutory findings by clear and convincing standard |
| Whether termination was in the child’s best interest | DHS: risk of harm if returned, lack of parental stability/compliance, high likelihood of adoption by foster parents | Leslie: no substantive contest presented | Court: held termination was in child’s best interest given risk and adoption prospects |
| Whether counsel may withdraw under no-merit procedure | Appellant’s counsel: no-merit brief shows no arguable appeal; motion to withdraw | Appellant: declined to file pro se points | Court: found compliance with no-merit rules and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw |
Key Cases Cited
- Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004) (procedural guidance for appeals and DHS cases)
- Dinkins v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 344 Ark. 207, 40 S.W.3d 286 (2001) (de novo review standard for termination-of-parental-rights cases)
- Mitchell v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 430 S.W.3d 851 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013) (requirement that statutory grounds and best interest be proved by clear and convincing evidence)
- J.T. v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 329 Ark. 243, 947 S.W.2d 761 (1997) (appellate standard for reviewing whether fact was proved by clear and convincing evidence)
- Yarborough v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 96 Ark. App. 247, 240 S.W.3d 626 (2006) (definition of clearly erroneous standard in termination context)
- Brown v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 521 S.W.3d 183 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017) (only one statutory ground is necessary to support termination)