P.W. v. Department of Family and Protective Services
403 S.W.3d 471
| Tex. App. | 2013Background
- DFPS sought termination of P.W.'s parental rights to Z.N.W. and R.K.T. after a bench trial.
- Trial court found clear and convincing grounds under Texas Family Code 161.001(1) and best interest supported termination.
- P.W. had prior narcotics arrest in 2007; she was under deferred adjudication and later imprisoned in 2011.
- Service plan required drug-free status, screenings, and rehab; P.W. completed outpatient but not inpatient rehab; admitted drug use.
- Children were placed with grandmother initially, then in a foster home since Oct. 2010, with a foster family seeking adoption if rights were terminated.
- P.W. was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment for drug-related conduct, affecting her ability to care for the children.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination based on 161.001 grounds and best interest supported | P.W. argues counsel ineffective and harms the process | Department contends grounds proven and best interest established; merits upheld | Term is affirmed on grounds and best interest; Strickland analysis upheld over Cronic |
| Whether Cronic presumption applies to ineffective assistance claim | Cronic should apply due to counsel’s complete failure | Cronic in civil termination not applicable; Strickland governs if record silent | Cronic does not apply; Strickland governs the standard and record is silent on counsel's reasons |
| Whether trial counsel's conduct was deficient and prejudicial under Strickland | Counsel's actions fell below objective standard; harmed outcome | Record silent on reasons; no showing of prejudice; evidence supports termination | No Strickland prong satisfied; no demonstrated prejudice; termination upheld |
| Whether evidence supports termination under §161.001(1)(D),(E) and best interests | Evidence shows danger to children and poor home environment | Record supports danger and fitness concerns; fostering plan supports best interest | Evidence supports grounds under (D) and (E) and best interests; termination affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534 (Tex. 2003) (ineffective-assistance standard; applied Strickland in termination)
- In re J.O.A., 283 S.W.3d 336 (Tex. 2009) (Strickland prongs required; no prejudice shown on record)
- In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2002) (clear and convincing evidence standard for termination)
- Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976) (best interests factors for termination)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (S. Ct. 1984) (standard for evaluating ineffective-assistance claims)
- United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 (S. Ct. 1984) (presumption of prejudice when counsel is wholly ineffective)