Roland v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
552 S.W.3d 443
Ark. Ct. App.2018Background
- Mother Tiffany Roland had a long DHS history and the children were adjudicated dependent-neglected after being found alone in a car; five of six children tested positive for illicit drugs and the children had malnourishment/medical issues.
- Circuit court previously found aggravated circumstances and changed goal to adoption; Roland did not appeal the adjudication/aggravated-circumstances findings.
- Roland showed minimal compliance with services, intermittent homelessness, positive drug tests during the case, and limited stable housing or parenting capacity after treatment.
- DHS filed termination petitions in mid-2017; the circuit court terminated Roland’s parental rights in November 2017, finding four statutory grounds proven and that termination was in the children’s best interest.
- Roland’s appellate counsel filed a no-merit brief and moved to withdraw under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-9; Roland received notice and did not file pro se points. The court affirmed termination and granted counsel’s withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel may file a no-merit brief and withdraw | Counsel: no meritorious appellate issues exist and brief explains why adverse rulings lack merit | DHS: (no brief filed); court evaluates compliance with Rule 6-9 and Linker-Flores | Allowed: counsel complied with Rule 6-9 and withdrawal was granted |
| Whether aggravated-circumstances finding could be challenged on appeal | Roland: (implicitly) challenge termination grounds | DHS/court: aggravated-circumstances challenge must be raised on adjudication appeal; Roland did not appeal earlier adjudication | Held: aggravated-circumstances ground not open on this appeal because Roland failed to appeal adjudication |
| Whether statutory grounds support termination | Roland: contest sufficiency of grounds | DHS: at least one statutory ground (aggravated circumstances) proven; only one needed | Held: sufficient — aggravated circumstances supported termination; other-ground challenges would be frivolous |
| Whether termination was in children’s best interest | Roland: return to mother argued via testimony about living arrangements and intentions | DHS: continued drug use, unstable housing, and risk of harm; children adoptable as sibling group | Held: termination in children’s best interest based on ongoing drug use, instability, and adoptability |
Key Cases Cited
- Linker-Flores v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004) (procedural requirements and standards for no-merit petitions in dependency cases)
- Cheney v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 396 S.W.3d 272 (Ark. App. 2012) (de novo review and standards for termination appeals)
- Pratt v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 413 S.W.3d 261 (Ark. App. 2012) (clear-and-convincing standard and review for factual findings)
- Harper v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 378 S.W.3d 884 (Ark. App. 2011) (best-interest considerations including adoptability and potential harm)
- Robinson v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 520 S.W.3d 322 (Ark. App. 2017) (continued parental drug use can establish potential harm supporting termination)