Sutton v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2016 Ark. App. 459
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- In Sept. 2013 DHS took custody of newborn A.S. and siblings after A.S. was born with cocaine in his system; mother Teria Sutton admitted recent cocaine use and a multi-year addiction history. Children were adjudicated dependent-neglected in Nov. 2013.
- Sutton completed some case-plan tasks (parenting classes, initial assessment, random screens) but repeatedly tested positive for cocaine in late 2013 and thereafter; she also cancelled multiple follow-up assessments and missed appointments.
- Sutton was incarcerated June 2014–Aug. 2015; DHS changed the permanency goal to adoption in Dec. 2014. After release, DHS continued to offer visitation, drug screens, and case coordination; Sutton tested positive for cocaine again on the day of the termination hearing (Mar. 8, 2016).
- DHS filed a termination petition alleging multiple statutory grounds, including the ‘‘out-of-custody-for-twelve-months and failure-to-remedy’’ ground and termination due to being sentenced for a substantial period of time in a child’s life.
- The trial court terminated Sutton’s parental rights on the out-of-custody/failure-to-remedy ground and the sentencing ground; Sutton appealed, arguing DHS failed to provide meaningful services after her release.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed de novo, found clear-and-convincing evidence that children had been out of Sutton’s custody for twelve months and that Sutton failed to remedy the conditions causing removal, and affirmed termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS proved the "out-of-custody 12 months and failure-to-remedy" statutory ground | Sutton: DHS failed to provide meaningful services after her release (no new assessment referral, late drug screens, inadequate visitation facilitation), so conditions were not meaningfully remedied | DHS: Offered services throughout case (assessments, treatment referrals, drug screens, visitation); Sutton cancelled assessments, moved counties, and failed to comply | Held: Affirmed — clear-and-convincing evidence that children were out of Sutton's custody >12 months and Sutton failed to remedy conditions despite DHS efforts |
| Whether DHS proved the "sentenced for a substantial period of time in the child's life" ground | Sutton did not contest merits on appeal (focused on services) | DHS pleaded this as alternative ground | Court did not reach this issue because it affirmed on the 12‑month ground |
Key Cases Cited
- Dinkins v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 344 Ark. 207, 40 S.W.3d 286 (2001) (appellate deference to trial court credibility findings in termination cases)