Dep't of Human Servs. v. M. G. D. (In re A. M. G. B.)

Full title: In the Matter of A. M. G. B., a Child. v. M. G. D., Appellant. DEPARTMENT…

Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon

Date published: Nov 8, 2023

329 Or. App. 115 (Or. Ct. App. 2023)

Opinion

A181163

11-08-2023

In the Matter of A. M. G. B., a Child. v. M. G. D., Appellant. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent,

Shannon Storey, Chief Defender, Juvenile Appellate Section, and Elena C. Stross, Deputy Public Defender, Offce of Public Defense Services, fled the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Kristen M. Naito, Assistant Attorney General, fled the brief for respondent.

JOYCE, J.

This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

Submitted October 11, 2023

Lane County Circuit Court 22JU01359; A181163 R. Curtis Conover, Judge.

Shannon Storey, Chief Defender, Juvenile Appellate Section, and Elena C. Stross, Deputy Public Defender, Offce of Public Defense Services, fled the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Kristen M. Naito, Assistant Attorney General, fled the brief for respondent.

Before Aoyagi, Presiding Judge, and Joyce, Judge, and Jacquot, Judge.

JOYCE, J.

Father appeals from a judgment terminating his parental rights to his daughter, A. The juvenile court concluded that father was "unfit by reason of conduct or condition seriously detrimental to [A] and [that] integration of [A] into [father's] home [was] improbable within a reasonable time due to conduct or conditions not likely to change." ORS 419B.504.¹ The court also concluded that termination of father's rights was in As best interests. ORS 419B.500(1). Having reviewed the record de novo, we conclude, as did the juvenile court, that there is clear and convincing evidence that father is unfit under ORS 419B.504 and that termination is in As best interests.

1 The juvenile court also terminated father's parental rights due to neglect, under ORS 419B.506. Because we conclude that the court did not err in terminating father's rights under ORS 419B.504, we do not need to reach the question whether the court erred in terminating father's rights under ORS 419B.506.

Affirmed.