Norton v. Arkansas Deparment of Human Services
2016 Ark. App. 43
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- DHS petitioned for emergency custody and dependency-neglect after a drug-use report following the death of Norton’s infant sibling.
- Norton tested positive for multiple controlled substances; his housing was unstable and he faced criminal penalties, including incarceration.
- S.N. was adjudged dependent-neglected in October 2013; Norton partially complied with the case plan but failed to resolve criminal issues or obtain stable housing.
- Agreed review and permanency plans noted Norton’s inconsistent engagement and ongoing drug-related problems.
- By December 2014, Norton refused drug testing and remained incarcerated; in February 2015 DHS sought termination of parental rights.
- The trial court terminated Norton’s parental rights on two grounds under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B): failure to remedy and subsequent factors; the appeal challenges the sufficiency of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was clear and convincing evidence Norton failed to remedy grounds. | Norton argues misuse had been remedied. | DHS asserts continued drug issues and lack of housing show failure to remedy. | Yes; evidence supported failure to remedy. |
| Whether the court properly considered subsequent factors to support termination. | Norton contends factors were remedied. | DHS shows ongoing incarceration and noncompliance with tests and court orders. | Yes; substantial evidence supported subsequent factors. |
| Whether termination was in S.N.’s best interest given evidence of adoption likelihood. | Norton asserts potential for reunification. | Child safety and stability favored termination. | Terminated; best interest shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gossett v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. App. 240, 374 S.W.3d 205 (Ark. App. 2010) (one or more grounds enough for termination; deference to trial court findings on clear and convincing evidence)
- Fenstermacher v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2013 Ark. App. 88, 426 S.W.3d 483 (Ark. App. 2013) (termination standards; de novo review; clear and convincing standard)
- Jones-Lee v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2009 Ark. App. 160, 316 S.W.3d 261 (Ark. App. 2009) (meaningful-efforts findings; preservation of objections)