Opinion
20210238
10-14-2021
In the Interest of D.H.H., a child v. D.H.H., a child; S.H., father, Respondents Thomas A. Gehrz, Assistant State's Attorney, Petitioner and Appellee and E.L.H., mother, Respondent and Appellant
Haley L. Wamstad, State's Attorney (appeared), Jacqueline A. Gaddie, Assistant State's Attorney (on brief), and Samantha Schmidt (argued), under the Rule on Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, Grand Forks, N.D., for petitioner and appellee. Benjamin C. Pulkrabek, Mandan, N.D., for respondent and appellant.
Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Jay D. Knudson, Judge.
Haley L. Wamstad, State's Attorney (appeared), Jacqueline A. Gaddie, Assistant State's Attorney (on brief), and Samantha Schmidt (argued), under the Rule on Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, Grand Forks, N.D., for petitioner and appellee.
Benjamin C. Pulkrabek, Mandan, N.D., for respondent and appellant.
PER CURIAM
[¶1] E.H. appeals from a juvenile court order terminating her parental rights to D.H.H. After a hearing on July 14, 2021, the juvenile court found D.H.H. was deprived, the deprivation was likely to continue, and the child had been in foster care for at least 450 out of the previous 660 nights under N.D.C.C. § 27-20-44 (now N.D.C.C. § 27-20.3-20). The court terminated E.H.'s parental rights.
[¶2] On appeal, E.H. argues the juvenile court erred by finding there was clear and convincing evidence to terminate her parental rights. After reviewing the record, we conclude the court's findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence and are not clearly erroneous. We conclude the court did not abuse its discretion in terminating E.H.'s parental rights. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).
[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W.VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte
AFFIRMED.