Opinion
No. COA15-1288
05-03-2016
IN THE MATTER OF: X.D.G. and X.A.I.G.
No brief filed by petitioner-appellee Caldwell County Department of Social Services. Mainsail Lawyers, by T. Richmond McPherson, III, for guardian ad litem. Leslie Rawls, for respondent-appellant-mother.
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. Caldwell County, Nos. 13 JA 18, 30 Appeal by respondent-mother from order entered 18 August 2015 by Judge Burford A. Cherry in District Court, Caldwell County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 18 April 2016. No brief filed by petitioner-appellee Caldwell County Department of Social Services. Mainsail Lawyers, by T. Richmond McPherson, III, for guardian ad litem. Leslie Rawls, for respondent-appellant-mother. STROUD, Judge.
Respondent appeals from an order terminating her parental rights as to the juveniles Jane and Lance. For the following reasons, we affirm.
Pseudonyms are used to protect the identity of the minors.
I. Background
On 6 February 2013, Caldwell County Department of Social Services ("DSS") filed a juvenile petition alleging Jane was a neglected and dependent juvenile. Based on a Child Protective Services report, DSS alleged that Jane was born prematurely in December of 2012 and was placed in the neonatal intensive care unit. Respondent did not have a home to take Jane to and also "did not have a car seat, baby bed, or much of any other items for the juvenile." Respondent had "limited" visits with Jane and failed to engage in the process of caring for her as recommended by the hospital staff. Numerous serious medical issues were identified in Jane causing her to be a "high risk infant[.]" Jane was allowed to leave the hospital with respondent to go to respondent's mother's home, but thereafter respondent failed to bring Jane to her scheduled doctor's appointment. Respondent said she had been "too tired to make it to the appointment[.]"
On 5 February 2013, respondent took her one-year-old son, Lance, to the doctor. Respondent kept Jane strapped in her car seat with her face covered by a blanket. Respondent left Jane in the car seat for almost four hours without changing her diaper or feeding her though the staff offered formula for Jane. The next day the juvenile petition was filed alleging neglect and dependency; on 18 February 2013, DSS filed a juvenile petition on behalf of Lance alleging neglect and dependency, noting safety concerns due to the instability of housing respondent had provided.
On 27 March 2013, the court adjudicated Jane and Lance to be dependent juveniles; in its dispositional order, the court found that respondent had entered into a case plan with DSS, but nonetheless remained unemployed, lacked stable housing, had not maintained contact, and had been in jail for a probation violation. On 2 July 2014, the court relieved DSS of further efforts to reunify respondent with Jane and Lance and established a permanent plan of adoption.
On 14 August 2014, DSS filed a motion for termination of respondent's parental rights. On 18 August 2015, the court terminated respondent's parental rights to Jane and Lance on the grounds of neglect and leaving the juveniles in DSS custody for more than twelve months without making progress to correct the conditions which led to their removal. Respondent appeals.
II. Appeal
Counsel for respondent-mother has filed a no-merit brief on her behalf stating that "[a]fter conscientiously and thoroughly reviewing the record on appeal, trial court file, and transcript the undersigned appellate counsel concludes that the record contains no issue of merit on which to base an argument for relief and the appeal is frivolous." Counsel asks this Court to conduct an independent examination of the case for possible error. Here, the termination order properly includes findings of fact supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that establish respondent left the children in the custody of DSS for more than twelve months without making reasonable progress to correct the conditions which led to removal, specifically to maintain stable housing, employment, and refrain from associating with persons involved in selling illegal drugs. See generally N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(2) (2013); see generally In re P.L.P., 173 N.C. App. 1, 8, 618 S.E.2d 241, 246 (2005), aff'd per curiam, 360 N.C. 360, 625 S.E.2d 779 (2006). The court further made appropriate dispositional findings and did not abuse its discretion in assessing the juveniles' best interests. See generally N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1110(a) (2013); In re Anderson, 151 N.C. App. 94, 98, 564 S.E.2d 599, 602 (2002).
III. Conclusion
Based upon our examination of the record, we hold that respondent's appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm the termination order.
AFFIRMED.
Chief Judge MCGEE and Judge BRYANT concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).