IN RE: ADOPTION OF M.C.F.
No. 1309 WDA 2019
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
FILED AUGUST 14, 2020
J-S75030-19; NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37; Appeal from the Order Entered June 20, 2019, in the Court of Common Pleas of Jefferson County, Orphans’ Court at No(s): No. 36A-2018 O.C.; BEFORE: STABILE, J., KUNSELMAN, J., and PELLEGRINI, J.*
In these consolidated appeals, the orphans’ court granted the petitions Appellee L.H.G. (Mother) filed to terminate the parental rights of Appellant C.F. (Father) to his six-year-old daughter and five-year-old son (collectively,
Procedurally, the matter returns to us following our previous remand. See In re Adoption of M.C.F., --- A.3d ---, 2020 PA Super 78 (Pa. Super. March 30, 2020). Father had originally submitted a petition to withdraw and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (2009). Faced with an Anders Brief and counsel‘s application to withdraw, it became our duty to “conduct an independent review of the record to discern if there are any additional, non-frivolous issues overlooked by counsel.” See Commonwealth v. Flowers, 113 A.3d 1246, 1250 (Pa. Super. 2015) (footnote omitted). We discovered such an issue, identified it, and remanded to allow Father‘s counsel to submit an advocate‘s brief in accordance with Commonwealth v. Tukhi, 149 A.3d 881, 886 (Pa. Super. 2016).
Father complied and submitted an advocate‘s brief. We also allowed Mother to submit an additional brief. Mother chose not to do so, but her counsel did submit a letter indicating that Mother and T.B. ended their relationship and that T.B. no longer intended to adopt the Children. After review, we vacate the termination orders and remand for further proceedings.
Given our previous remand and our current disposition, we summarize the facts as follows:
Mother and Father wed in 2014 and are now divorced. They are the parents of two children, M.C.F. and M.N.F.1 The orphans’ court described the relationship between Mother and Father as tumultuous, detailing incidents of Father‘s domestic violence. See generally Orphans’ Court Opinion, 6/20/19, 1-9. Mother claimed Father has not been involved in the Children‘s lives since early February 2017. Mother and her fiancé, T.B., have been together following Father‘s absence. T.B. is trained to work with people who have intellectual disabilities, which has benefitted M.C.F. as he is on the Autism spectrum. Mother and T.B. reside together with the Children and are engaged to be married. Mother brought petitions to involuntarily terminate Father‘s parental rights under
23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(1) ,(2) , and(b) .2 In her termination petitions, Mother averred that her fiancé, T.B., intended to adopt the Children. Father was incarcerated at various points throughout the case, including at the time of the termination hearing on May 23, 2019. The orphans’ court granted the petitions on June 20, 2019. Father appealed.
In re Adoption of M.C.F., at *1 (footnotes original).
The issue of arguable merit we discovered in the course of our independent review is as follows:
whether Mother demonstrated that valid adoptions were anticipated to render her termination petitions cognizable, given that Mother and T.B. were not married when Mother filed her termination petitions.
The High Court observed that a petition to terminate a natural parent‘s rights involuntarily, when filed by one parent against the other, is only cognizable when it is accompanied by a prospective stepparent‘s intention to
In the case at bar, we initially remanded so the parties could address whether Mother‘s termination petitions were cognizable. Mother averred that her fiancé – as opposed to her spouse – intended to adoption the Children, in apparent contravention of
Orders vacated. Jurisdiction relinquished.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 8/14/2020
IN RE: ADOPTION OF M.N.F.
No. 1310 WDA 2019
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Appeal from the Order Entered June 20, 2019, in the Court of Common Pleas of Jefferson County, Orphans’ Court at No(s): 35A-2018 O.C.; BEFORE: STABILE, J., KUNSELMAN, J., and PELLEGRINI, J.*
Notes
Section 2901 states, verbatim: “Unless the court for cause shown determines otherwise, no decree of adoption shall be entered unless the natural parent or parents’ rights have been terminated, the investigation required by section 2535 (relating to investigation) has been completed, the report of the intermediary has been filed pursuant to section 2533 (relating to report of intermediary) and all other legal requirements have been met. If all legal requirements have been met, the court may enter a decree of adoption at any time.”