Background

• Father (Roberto F.) had his parental rights to children L.F. and I.A. terminated by the juvenile court in Nov. 2011 and appealed that termination.
• While the termination appeal was pending, DCS filed an adoption petition for the children to be adopted by Jimmy S. and Tracie H.; the juvenile court entered an adoption order in May 2012 without notifying Father of the adoption proceedings or his pending appeal.
• The court of appeals vacated the termination order in Roberto I, after which Father moved in the juvenile court under Ariz. R. Proc. Juv. Ct. 85(A) to set aside the adoption; the juvenile court denied the motion.
• The court of appeals in Roberto II then vacated the adoption order, concluding Rule 103(F) divested the juvenile court of authority to enter the adoption while the termination appeal was pending.
• The Arizona Supreme Court granted review on whether Rule 103(F) strips juvenile courts of authority to enter adoption orders during a biological parent’s appeal of a termination-of-rights order.
• The Supreme Court held Rule 103(F) applies only to the case on appeal and therefore does not bar juvenile courts from entering adoption orders in separate adoption proceedings while a termination appeal is pending; it vacated the court of appeals’ opinion in Roberto II and remanded to address whether the juvenile court erred in denying Father’s Rule 85(A) motion.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Roberto F. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 232 Ariz. 45 (App. 2013) (court of appeals decision vacating termination order)
• Roberto F. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, 235 Ariz. 388 (App. 2014) (court of appeals decision that had vacated the adoption order based on Rule 103(F))
• State v. Salazar-Mercado, 234 Ariz. 590 (2014) (principles for interpreting court rules)
• Rita J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 196 Ariz. 512 (1999) (discussing expedited permanency procedures and compliance with federal adoption policy)