Opinion
DOCKET NO. A-4905-14T2
09-06-2016
NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. K.S., Defendant-Appellant, and A.L., SR., Defendant. IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF A.L., JR. and A.K.L., Minors.
Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Christine Olexa Saginor, Designated Counsel, on the briefs). Christopher S. Porrino, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Andrea M. Silkowitz, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Ramiro A. Perez, Deputy Attorney General, on the briefs). Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, Law Guardian, attorney for minors (Nancy P. Fratz, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, on the briefs).
RECORD IMPOUNDED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Before Judges Fuentes, Koblitz and Gilson. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Passaic County, Docket No. FG-16-72-15. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Christine Olexa Saginor, Designated Counsel, on the briefs). Christopher S. Porrino, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Andrea M. Silkowitz, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Ramiro A. Perez, Deputy Attorney General, on the briefs). Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, Law Guardian, attorney for minors (Nancy P. Fratz, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, on the briefs). PER CURIAM
Defendant-appellant K.S., the biological mother of four young children, appeals from the termination of her parental rights. We reversed and remanded to give K.S. an opportunity to testify, retaining jurisdiction. N.J. Div. of Child Prot. & Permanency v. K.S., 445 N.J. Super. 384, 394 (App. Div. 2016). We now affirm the termination of K.S.'s parental rights, based substantially on the trial judge's thorough written decision of June 19, 2015, supplemented by his July 14, 2016 written opinion discussing K.S.'s testimony.
We use initials to protect the confidentiality of the participants in these proceedings. See R. 1:38-3(d)(10), (12).
Only K.S.'s two oldest children are subject to this appeal.
A.L., Sr., the biological father of the two oldest children, could not be found and an affidavit of diligent inquiry was filed with the trial court. A default judgment of guardianship terminating his parental rights was entered by reason of abandonment, N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1(b)(1)(a)-(b). --------
The evidence is outlined in detail in the judge's two opinions. A summary was provided in our earlier opinion. See id. at 387-89. K.S. was unable to provide a credible explanation for her failure to regularly visit her children or take full advantage of the many rehabilitative programs offered to her by the Division of Child Protection and Permanency (Division). She has not visited her children since September 2015. Her two children reside with their half-siblings in a home where the resource parents have expressed the desire to adopt all four children.
In his comprehensive opinions, the trial judge found the Division had proven all four prongs of the best interests test, N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1(a), and thus concluded termination of K.S.'s parental rights was in the children's best interests. On this appeal, our review of the trial judge's "decision is limited." Finamore v. Aronson, 382 N.J. Super. 514, 519 (App. Div. 2006). We defer to his expertise as a Family Part judge, Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394, 412-13 (1998), and we are bound by his factual findings so long as they are supported by sufficient credible evidence, N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. M.M., 189 N.J. 261, 279 (2007) (citing In re Guardianship of J.T., 269 N.J. Super. 172, 188 (App. Div. 1993)). After reviewing the record, we conclude the trial judge's factual findings are fully supported by the record and, in light of those facts, his legal conclusions are unassailable.
Affirmed. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original on file in my office.
CLERK OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION