Sims v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2015 Ark. App. 137
Ark. Ct. App.2015Background
- DHS petitioned for emergency custody after three children (ages 5, 3, 1) were found alone following Sims’s arrest for child endangerment in May 2013.
- Children were adjudicated dependent-neglected; reunification services and a case plan (drug treatment, counseling, psychological evaluation, parenting classes, supervised visitation, stable housing/employment, random drug screens) were ordered.
- Sims completed inpatient drug treatment but failed outpatient treatment, missed counseling and psychological evaluation, had repeated positive drug screens, lacked stable housing/employment, and ceased regular contact/visitation with the children.
- DHS changed the permanency goal to termination and filed a petition alleging five statutory grounds for termination under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B).
- At the termination hearing, the court found clear and convincing evidence supporting termination on all alleged grounds, found termination was in the children’s best interest, suspended visitation after the petition was filed, and entered the termination order; Sims appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Sims’s Argument | DHS’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether clear and convincing evidence supported termination under the "subsequent-issues" ground | Sims argued she should be given more time to reunify and could be ready within 60 days | DHS argued Sims’s continued addiction, noncompliance with services, instability, and lack of contact showed incapacity/indifference to remedy conditions | Court affirmed: evidence supported termination under the subsequent-issues ground and one ground suffices |
| Whether termination was in the children’s best interest (including adoptability and potential harm on return) | Sims argued continued reunification time was in children’s interest | DHS argued return would risk children’s safety; children were adoptable | Court affirmed: termination was in children’s best interest; reunification within a child-appropriate timeframe was unlikely |
| Whether the court erred by suspending visitation after the termination petition was filed | Sims did not respond to the motion; implicitly argued suspension improper | DHS argued suspension was appropriate given lack of visitation, ongoing drug use, and pending termination petition | Court reviewed and affirmed suspension as nonmeritorious to challenge given record and timing |
| Whether counsel’s no-merit brief and motion to withdraw complied with procedure | Sims’s counsel submitted no pro se points; Sims did not file pro se points | DHS not applicable | Court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw and agreed the appeal was without merit |
Key Cases Cited
- Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (court procedure on no-merit briefs and withdrawal of counsel)
- Dinkins v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 344 Ark. 207, 40 S.W.3d 286 (standard: termination requires clear and convincing evidence; appellate review for clear error)
- Lee v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 102 Ark. App. 337, 285 S.W.3d 277 (one proven ground suffices to support termination)
- Lewis v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 364 Ark. 243, 217 S.W.3d 788 (scope of appellate review in no-merit termination appeals)