Opinion
NO. 2016-CA-000654-ME NO. 2016-CA-000655-ME NO. 2015-CA-000656-ME NO. 2015-CA-000657-ME
06-23-2017
D.H.L., NATURAL FATHER APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, CABINET FOR HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES; B.L.H. (NATURAL MOTHER); AND B.L.H. (A MINOR CHILD) APPELLEES AND D.H.L., NATURAL FATHER APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, CABINET FOR HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES; B.L.H. (NATURAL MOTHER); AND C.E.L. (A MINOR CHILD) APPELLEES AND D.H.L., NATURAL FATHER APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, CABINET FOR HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES; B.L.H. (NATURAL MOTHER); AND L.M.L. (A MINOR CHILD) APPELLEES AND D.H.L., NATURAL FATHER APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, CABINET FOR HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES; B.L.H. (NATURAL MOTHER); AND S.H.L. (A MINOR CHILD) APPELLEES
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Jan Shaw Williamstown, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Leslie M. Laupp Covington, Kentucky
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED APPEAL FROM GRANT CIRCUIT COURT, HONORABLE REBECCA LESLIE KNIGHT, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 15-AD-00027 APPEAL FROM GRANT CIRCUIT COURT, HONORABLE REBECCA LESLIE KNIGHT, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 15-AD-00028 APPEAL FROM GRANT CIRCUIT COURT, HONORABLE REBECCA LESLIE KNIGHT, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 15-AD-00029 APPEAL FROM GRANT CIRCUIT COURT, HONORABLE REBECCA LESLIE KNIGHT, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 15-AD-00030 OPINION
AFFIRMING
** ** ** ** **
BEFORE: KRAMER, CHIEF JUDGE; CLAYTON AND THOMPSON, JUDGES. KRAMER, CHIEF JUDGE: D.H.L. (Father) appeals from the Grant Circuit Court's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Judgment Terminating Parental Rights in this case involving his four minor children. In accordance with A.C. v. Cabinet for Health and Family Servs., 362 S.W.3d 361 (Ky. App. 2012), counsel for Father filed an Anders brief stating that the appeal is frivolous, which was accompanied by a motion to withdraw as counsel. After a careful review of the record, we affirm. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw by separate order.
The court also terminated the parental rights of the four children's mother. Her appeals, enumerated as 2016-CA-00620; 2016-CA-00621; 2016-CA-00623; and 2016-CA-00624, are addressed in a separate opinion.
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). --------
The four children at issue in this appeal were born in 2007, 2010, 2012, and 2013. As of the March 2016 final termination hearing, the youngest child was two and the oldest was eight. All children share the same biological Mother and Father.
In 2009, when only the oldest child had been born, the Cabinet for Health and Family Services filed an emergency custody petition in Kenton County Family Court alleging Father and Mother were homeless and there were reports of domestic violence between them. Shortly thereafter, the family court made a finding of neglect based on the allegation contained in the petition.
Again, in 2010, shortly after the second child was born, the Cabinet filed another emergency petition on behalf of both children due to continued concerns of domestic violence between Mother and Father and Father's failure to comply with the emergency protective order (EPO) in place at that time. Another finding of neglect was made a few weeks later for the two children.
A few years later, after the third child was born, the Cabinet filed a third emergency custody petition alleging that both parents were abusing drugs, there was no food in the home, and there were concerns of domestic violence. The court made a finding of neglect in May 2013. In July 2013, after the youngest child was born, the Cabinet again filed an emergency petition alleging Mother had no prenatal care and that she and the child tested positive at birth for illegal substances. Both parents admitted to a finding of neglect, and all four children were placed in foster care at that time.
After Mother attempted to turn her life around and going through several months of supervised visitation, which eventually turned into unsupervised weekend visitation, the Grant County District Court placed the children back with Mother April 1, 2015. Mother was explicitly ordered that Father was to have no contact with her or the four children. Father had been incarcerated numerous times over the children's lives, and he failed to engage in the case plan established for him in 2009 or abide by the multitude of court orders.
However, by April 16, 2015, Father had moved into Mother's residence and began residing with her and the children. Shortly thereafter, because of this violation, the children were removed from Mother's custody for the last time. Since that date, the children have been residing with their respective foster families.
In May 2015, the cabinet petitioned to terminate the parental rights of Father and Mother. In April 2016, after a lengthy final hearing, the rights of both parents were terminated.
This appeal followed.
On appeal, counsel for father filed an Anders brief stating that the instant appeal is frivolous. When appointed counsel files an Anders brief, the Court of Appeals is bound to "independently review the record and ascertain whether the appeal is, in fact, void of nonfrivolous grounds for reversal." A.C., 362 S.W.3d at 372. In Kentucky, parental rights "can be involuntarily terminated only if there is clear and convincing evidence that . . . it would be in the best interest of the child to do so." Cabinet for Health & Family Servs. v. A.G.G., 190 S.W.3d 338, 342 (Ky. 2006) (citing KRS 625.090; Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 769-70, 102 S. Ct. 1388, 1403, 71 L.Ed. 2d 599 (1982); N.S. v. C & M.S., 642 S.W.2d 589, 591 (Ky. 1982)). KRS 625.090(1) also requires that a child be adjudged neglected or abused and that at least one of the conditions set out in KRS 625.090(2) be established by clear and convincing evidence in order to terminate parental rights.
In this case, we conducted a thorough and independent review of the record and conclude that more than sufficient evidence supports the circuit court's order terminating Father's parental rights as to the four children. The circuit court rendered detailed findings of fact which we adopt herein by reference. The court complied with all relevant statutory mandates for involuntarily terminating Father's parental rights, and the court conducted an evidentiary hearing where Father was present and testified on his own behalf. We can find no legal basis or reason to set aside the circuit court's judgment terminating Father's parental rights. We agree with counsel that no valid basis exists to warrant relief from the judgment. See A.C., 362 S.W.3d at 361. Accordingly, the circuit court did not err by terminating Father's parental rights as to all four of the children at issue.
For the foregoing reasons, the order terminating parental rights and judgment thereon by the Grant County Circuit Court is affirmed.
ALL CONCUR. BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Jan Shaw
Williamstown, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Leslie M. Laupp
Covington, Kentucky