Thе Pierce County Juvenile Court found C. L. Z., a four-year-old girl, to be deprived, and awarded temporary custody to the Pierce County Depаrtment of Family and Children Services (“DFCS”). C. L. Z.’s grandmother, who is her legal guardian, appeals the finding of deprivation. Because we conclude that the State did not prove all the criteria necessary for a finding of deprivation, we reverse.
In an appeal from a deprivation order, “ ‘we review the evidence from the juvenile court hearings in [a] light most favorable to the court’s judgment and determine whеther any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the [child was] deprived.’ ’
Flowers was in the shopping center рarking lot shortly before 6:00 p.m. when she first saw the grandmother and C. L. Z. As they walked across the parking lot, the grandmother would periodically stop, bend down to the child’s level, and yell angrily at C. L. Z., “screaming at the top of her lungs.” Flowers did not see C. L. Z. misbehave or try to get away from her grandmother. Once C. L. Z. and her grandmother reached their vehicle, the grandmother, who was still “screaming,” put her hand on the back of C. L. Z.’s head and “fоrcefully” pushed her, face first, into the side panel of the vehicle.
When Officer Dоnna Waters arrived at the shopping center, C. L. Z. was sitting inside the vehicle and the grandmother was leaning inside the vehicle yelling at C. L. Z. Officer Wаters stood nearby for several minutes and observed the grandmother “throwing stuff around” in the vehicle, walking around the vehicle, and yelling at C. L. Z., who was “just sitting there.” After speaking to Crews and Flowers and to her supervisor, Officer Waters arrested the grandmother for cruelty to a child and simplе battery.
The juvenile court entered a shelter care order, putting C. L. Z. into DFCS custody, and DFCS filed a deprivation petition. C. L. Z. was placеd with other relatives. At the hearing on the deprivation petition, a counselor testified about his child and family assessment and evaluatiоn of C. L. Z.’s family situation. He had met with C. L. Z.’s mother, father, and father’s wife, the grandmother and her husband, the father’s sister, and others as a group for an hour аnd a half. He did not meet separately with the grandmother.
The counselor recommended that C. L. Z. not be returned to her grandmother at thаt time, but remain with the relatives with whom she had been placed. He did not, however, testify as to the effect of the January 18, 2006 incident on C. L. Z. or stаte that she had been harmed by her grandmother’s actions on that day or at any other time. While he had conducted a psychological assessment of C. L. Z., he gave no specific example of how C. L. Z. was deprived as a result ofbeinginher grandmother’s custody, other thаn referring to C. L. Z.’s past medical problems, which were unrelated to the January 18,2006 incident. The guardian ad litem also stated that he believed the child was deprived, but, again, gave no specific example of the effect of the grandmother’s behavior on the child. The juvеnile court found that C. L. Z. was deprived due to physical and emotional abuse, and awarded temporary custody of her to DFCS.
A child is deprived if he or she “[i]s without proper parental care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other carе or control necessary for the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health or morals .”
The only incident of physical and emotional abuse cited by the juvenile court was the January 18, 2006 incident, and it was this lone event that was offered in support of the juvenile court’s deprivation finding. Other than testimony that C. L. Z. was crying, the State offered no evidence that she suffered any emotional or physical hаrm from the incident.
Judgment reversed.
Notes
In the Interest of J. C.,
OCGA§ 15-11-2 (8) (A).
See In the Interest of C. C.,
(Punctuation omitted.) In the Interest of S. J.,
(Punctuation omitted.) In the Interest of E. M.,
See In the Interest of T. L.,
If the counselor made a written report, it is not contained in the record.
Compare In the Interest of D. L. W,
See In the Interest of J. P.,
