Mosher v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
455 S.W.3d 367
Ark. Ct. App.2015Background
- I.G. was removed from Christina Mosher’s custody shortly after her birth in Feb. 2013; DHS alleged Mosher was an unfit parent and obtained emergency custody.
- Mosher had four older children previously adjudicated dependent-neglected and whose parental rights were involuntarily terminated in Jan. 2014; a prior psychological evaluation described Mosher as having a personality disorder, borderline intellectual functioning, and as "incompetent as a parent."
- The juvenile court set reunification services: stable housing, employment, income, weekly supervised visits contingent on drug screens, and continued compliance with services from Mosher’s earlier DHS case.
- Over the following year Mosher showed limited, inconsistent progress (sporadic employment, financial instability, poor judgment regarding associates, lack of responsibility for removals); DHS and the court found credibility and compliance issues.
- In Feb. 2014 the court changed the goal to termination/adoption. DHS petitioned to terminate Mosher’s parental rights in Mar. 2014 alleging multiple statutory grounds, including prior involuntary termination as to siblings.
- The circuit court terminated Mosher’s parental rights in June 2014, finding clear and convincing evidence of statutory grounds and that termination was in I.G.’s best interest; Mosher appealed. Her appellate counsel filed a no-merit brief and moved to withdraw; this Court affirms and grants withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Mosher's Argument | DHS / State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Mosher’s motion for continuance filed 5 days before the termination hearing | Mosher argued recent progress (employment, bonding) warranted a continuance to show improvement | DHS argued recent progress is evidence for the hearing, not a basis to delay; continuance requires good cause and diligence | Denial affirmed; no abuse of discretion (motion filed too late; progress should be presented at hearing) |
| Whether there was clear and convincing evidence to terminate parental rights | Mosher contested termination and disputed grounds/reasonableness of findings | DHS relied on statutory grounds, including prior involuntary termination as to siblings and lack of measurable progress, plus best-interest findings | Affirmed; termination supported by clear and convincing evidence (at least one statutory ground proven) |
| Whether prior involuntary termination of Mosher’s parental rights to siblings is a sufficient statutory ground for terminating rights to I.G. | Mosher implicitly disputed reliance on prior sibling termination | DHS asserted sibling-termination is an immediate statutory ground for termination under § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B) | Affirmed; prior involuntary termination to siblings alone is sufficient to support termination |
| Whether termination was in the child’s best interest (including adoptability and risk to health/safety) | Mosher denied responsibility for past conduct and argued for reunification prospects | DHS presented evidence of risk, lack of parental insight, and adoptability; adoption specialist testified to adoptability prospects | Affirmed; court’s best-interest finding was not clearly erroneous (risk to child and likelihood of adoption) |
Key Cases Cited
- Dinkins v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 344 Ark. 207 (2001) (standard for clear and convincing evidence and appellate review of termination findings)
- Lee v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 102 Ark. App. 337 (2008) (only one statutory ground is required to support termination)
- Phillips v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 85 Ark. App. 450 (2004) (prior involuntary termination as to siblings is a statutory ground for termination)
- Cotton v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 422 S.W.3d 130 (2012) (denial of continuance reviewed for abuse of discretion; movant diligence is a factor)