Walter C. v. Dcs, J.C.
1 CA-JV 21-0089
| Ariz. Ct. App. | Sep 21, 2021Background:
- J.C., born in 2018, was taken into DCS custody at birth after both parents tested positive for controlled substances (mother admitted meth use during pregnancy; father tested positive for cocaine and meth in a hair follicle test).
- DCS filed a dependency petition, set a reunification case plan, and offered services including substance‑abuse treatment, psychological evaluation, domestic‑violence counseling, supervised visitation, and drug testing.
- Father’s participation was sporadic: multiple positive drug tests (cocaine, marijuana, meth), missed drug‑test call‑ins, inconsistent attendance in treatment, and a 2019 domestic‑violence conviction that led to incarceration and disrupted services.
- After periods of engagement, Father relapsed several times; DCS escalated treatment levels and referred him to individualized counseling, but attendance problems persisted and he was discharged from one provider for excessive absences.
- DCS moved to terminate Father’s parental rights (substance‑abuse ground and 15‑month time‑in‑care). The juvenile court found clear and convincing evidence of the substance‑abuse ground, concluded termination was in the child’s best interests, and found DCS made reasonable reunification efforts. Father appealed only the reasonable‑efforts finding.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DCS made reasonable efforts to reunify | DCS conceded some failures (December 2020 drug‑testing lapse; missed court orders for referrals), so DCS did not meet its burden of reasonable efforts | Despite some administrative lapses, DCS provided extensive services over ~18 months and assisted Father in obtaining domestic‑violence counseling; documentary record shows reasonable efforts | Court affirmed: reasonable evidence supports finding DCS made reasonable efforts (look to totality of services, not isolated lapses) |
| Whether the court could rely on documentary evidence over caseworker testimony | Father argued the court should credit the caseworker’s concessions and discount DCS‑generated documents | Court may judge witness credibility and rely on documentary exhibits even if the caseworker was not found credible | Court affirmed: relying on unchallenged documentary evidence was within discretion; no requirement to cite every exhibit |
Key Cases Cited
- Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279 (2005) (termination requires statutory ground by clear and convincing evidence and best interests by preponderance)
- Jordan C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 223 Ariz. 86 (App. 2009) (appellate review defers to reasonable evidence supporting trial court)
- Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. JS-501904, 180 Ariz. 348 (App. 1994) (reasonable reunification efforts = time and opportunity to participate in remedial programs)
- Jennifer G. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 211 Ariz. 450 (App. 2005) (DCS must make reasonable efforts or show futility)
- DePasquale v. Superior Court, 181 Ariz. 333 (App. 1995) (trial court must exercise independent judgment; not bound to a witness’s legal conclusions)
- In re David H., 192 Ariz. 459 (App. 1998) (credibility determinations and conflict resolution are for the trial court)
- Donald W. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, 247 Ariz. 9 (App. 2019) (court assesses totality of circumstances when judging diligent efforts)
- Matter of Pima Cnty. Severance Action No. S-2397, 161 Ariz. 574 (App. 1989) (DCS not required to provide services a parent already receives)
- Ruben M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 230 Ariz. 236 (2012) (juvenile court must state conclusions of law and at least one supporting factual finding)