Summary 2012 WY 150

Summary of Decision November 28, 2012

Justice Voigt delivered the opinion for the Court. Affirmed.

Case Names: IN THE MATTER OF THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS TO: KAT, SAT, and JGS, Minor Children, NLT v. THE STATE OF WYOMING, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES

IN THE MATTER OF THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS TO: JGS, Minor Child, MDS v. THE STATE OF WYOMING, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES
Docket Numbers: S-12-0068 and S-12-0069

URL: http://www.courts.state.wy.us/Opinions.aspx

Appeals from the District Court of Hot Springs County, Honorable Robert E. Skar, Judge

Case No. S-12-0068:

Representing Appellant: Mary L. Scheible of Scheible Law Office, Thermopolis, Wyoming.
Representing Appellee: Gregory A. Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; Robin Sessions Cooley, Deputy Attorney General; Jill E. Kucera, Senior Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Ms. Kucera.

Guardian Ad Litem: Bobbi D. Overfield of Messenger & Overfield, P.C., Thermopolis, Wyoming.

Case No. S-12-0069:
Representing Appellant: Christopher J. King of Worrall & Greear, P.C., Worland, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee: Gregory A. Phillips, Wyoming Attorney General; Robin Sessions Cooley, Deputy Attorney General; Jill E. Kucera, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Christina F. McCabe, Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Ms. McCabe.

Guardian Ad Litem: Bobbi D. Overfield of Messenger & Overfield, P.C., Thermopolis, Wyoming.

Date of Decision: November 28, 2012

Facts: This opinion encompasses two separate cases that have been consolidated for the purpose of decision. NLT, who is one of the appellants in this matter, is the mother of KAT, SAT, and JGS. The other appellant, MDS, is the father of JGS. Following a five-day bench trial, the district court terminated NLT’s and MDS’s parental rights to the minor children. Both parents appealed, claiming that the Department of Family Services (DFS) failed to provide clear and convincing evidence that their parental rights should be terminated. We affirm the district court’s decision.

Issues: Did DFS present clear and convincing evidence to support the district court’s decision to terminate NLT’s parental rights to KAT, SAT, and JGS? Did DFS present clear and convincing evidence to support the district court’s decision to terminate MDS’s parental rights to JGS?

Holdings: DFS presented clear and convincing evidence at trial to support the district court’s decision to terminate NLT’s parental rights to KAT, SAT, and JGS, pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 14-2-309(a)(v). The evidence demonstrated that all of the children had been in foster care for 15 of the most recent 22 months, and that NLT continuously put her children in dangerous situations, placed the wants and desires of her ex-husband and boyfriends ahead of the welfare of her children, and cannot meet the basic financial and parental needs of the children. The evidence also showed that NLT would never be able to provide adequate care for her children absent extraordinary help from service providers. DFS also presented clear and convincing evidence to support the district court’s decision to terminate MDS’s parental rights to JGS, pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 14-2-309(a)(iv). MDS is currently serving two consecutive sentences of not less than 20 years nor more than 35 years in prison for sexually abusing KAT. MDS cannot appropriately care for JGS’s ongoing physical, mental or emotional needs while he is in prison and will not be eligible for parole until JGS is in his adulthood. Further, the evidence demonstrates that MDS is a sexual offender who suffers from such moral delinquency that he cannot be considered a fit parent. We affirm both of the district court orders terminating NLT’s and MDS’s rights to KAT, SAT, and JGS.

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

Summary 2007 WY 196

Summary of Decision issued December 12, 2007

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses "Universal Citation" and was given an "official" citation when issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will note that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion should include the reporter page number. If you need assistance, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: K.H. v. Wyoming Dep’t of Family Services

Citation: 2007 WY 196

Docket Number: C-07-2

Appeal from the District Court of Platte County, the Honorable Keith G. Kautz, Judge

Representing Appellant (Respondent): Matthew F.G. Castano, Brown & Hiser, LLC, Laramie, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee (Petitioner): Patrick J. Crank, Attorney Genera; Robin Sessions Cooley, Deputy Attorney General; Dan S. Wilde, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Stacey L. Obrecht, Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Ms. Obrecht.

Guardian Ad Litem: Eric Eugene Jones, Wheatland, Wyoming.

Issue: Whether the district court erred by terminating the parental rights of Mother when the Department of Family Services (DFS) had failed to comply with its own written policy of attempting to place children with relatives prior to placing them in non-relative foster care.

Facts/Discussion: Mother appeals the district court’s decision terminating her parental rights.
Mother claimed that DFS should have placed her children with Grandmother because DFS’s Family Services Manual encourages its employees to place children with family members rather than in foster homes. DFS had initiated home evaluations for each of the relatives that Mother had submitted. DFS was justified in declining to place the children with Grandmother considering the risk to their well-being as revealed by the home evaluations.
Mother relied on MB v. Dep’t of Fam. Svcs. The Court noted that MB was factually distinguishable from the instant case. Mother did not dispute that she knew her case plan and that DFS notified her of the goals she would have to meet to achieve family reunification.

Holding: The Court reviewed the record and determined that even if they had evaluated DFS’s placement actions, they would not have concluded that DFS violated its rules. The children had been in foster care for 15 of the previous 22 months and accordingly, DFS was empowered by statute to commence termination proceedings.
In light of the Court’s resolution of Mother’s substantive claim, they did not address her ineffectiveness of counsel issue.

Affirmed.

J. Burke delivered the opinion.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/2fkzac .