TN Supreme Court Affirms Termination of Parental Rights Despite Claim of Ineffective Lawyer
- At June 22, 2016
- By Miles Mason
- In Family Law
0
Tennessee case summary on parental rights termination.
The mother in this Tennessee parental rights termination case gave birth to six children between 1996 and 2004. Even before the birth of the sixth child, Carrington, both the mother and father were in court in Lewis County in a child protection action. In 2005, all six children were removed from their custody and placed with the maternal grandmother and aunt. Much more litigation followed until 2013, when the State of Tennessee filed an action to terminate parental rights. The state alleged noncompliance with prior orders, persistent poor conditions, and mental incompetence. At the 2013 hearing, the mother was represented by an appointed attorney who made an opening statement and cross examined witnesses. After hearing much evidence, the Juvenile Court terminated the mother’s parental rights, based upon the grounds stated in the petition.
The mother’s appointed attorney appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals, which affirmed the trial court’s judgment in 2014.
The mother’s appointed attorney was allowed to withdraw from the case, and the mother then asked for permission to appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court, on the grounds that her appointed attorney had been ineffective. The Supreme Court assigned a new attorney and allowed her to appeal.
The high court first noted that parental termination cases present important constitutional issues, and that the parent is entitled to a fundamentally fair procedure. It noted that clear and convincing evidence is required. In this case, the mother argued that the appointed attorney had not argued on appeal that this standard had not been met. The Supreme Court was sympathetic to this argument, and agreed that it should have at least been brought to the Court of Appeal’s attention. It noted that it failed to see how a requirement that the sufficiency of the evidence must be addressed would unduly burden the court. Therefore, it held that even though the issue had not been raised on appeal, it would be proper to address the issue of whether the evidence had been sufficient. Rather than remand the case to the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court simply reviewed the issue itself, even though it had not been raised previously.
The high court first agreed with the lower court that the mother had failed to substantially comply with prior court orders. For example, she had been ordered to undergo random drug testing, but had failed to do so.
The Supreme Court also agreed that the conditions that initially led to loss of custody had persisted. The mother had severe behavioral concerns, and there had been no evidence that she had addressed these issues. Therefore, it held that the state had proven that the bad conditions had continued to persist.
Finally, the Supreme Court agreed with the lower court that the mother’s mental condition was such that she was an unfit parent. She had been hospitalized a number of times for mental health and substance abuse issues. Mental health experts had testified that her condition prevented her from assuming care and responsibility for children.
The high court then went on to review the evidence and conclude that termination of parental rights was in the child’s best interest. For these reasons, it affirmed the judgment of the lower courts.
No. M2014-00453-SC-R11-PT (Tenn. Jan. 29, 2016).
See original opinion for exact language. Legal citations omitted.
To learn more, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee.
