On Point blog, page 4 of 20
Circular reasoning upheld as mother testifies about father’s suspected heroin use during TPR trial
N.D. v. E.S., 2022AP1084, District 2, 01/25/23 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Nancy (N.D.) petitioned to terminate Ed’s (E.D.’s) parental rights on the grounds that he abandoned their daughter, Kim. See Wis. Stat. § 48.415(1). At trial, Ed asserted a “good cause” defense that Nancy prevented him from having contact with Kim, and in response, Nancy was allowed to testify that the reason for her interference was Ed’s “heroin use.” Despite the fact that Nancy had no personal knowledge of Ed’s suspected heroin use, the circuit court ruled, and the court of appeals agrees, that the fact that Ed admitted to being drug tested was sufficient foundation for Nancy’s testimony. As a result, Ed’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims related to this evidence fails.
Evidence proved County made reasonable efforts to provide services to parent under CHIPS order
Rusk County DHHS v. R.S., 2022AP1530, District 3, 1/20/23 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
R.S. (“Ruth”) argues that at the trial on the County’s petition to terminate her parental rights, the County Department of Health and Human Services didn’t prove it made reasonable efforts to provide the services ordered in the original CHIPS dispositional order. The court of appeals rejects the claim.
COA affirms summary judgment finding abandonment in TPR
L.E.H. v. R.E.M., 2022AP713-715, 11/22/11, District 1; (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
“Luke” and “Rebecca” had 3 children together. After their relationship ended, Rebecca struggled with addiction and was charged with a number of crimes. Luke married and successfully petitioned to terminate Rebecca’s parental rights. Rebecca appealed the TPR arguing the circuit court (1) improperly granted summary judgment on the grounds that she abandoned her children, and (2) created the appearance of bias during the disposition hearing.
COA again rejects challenges to TPR
Portage County DH & HS v. S.Z. & C.Z., 2022AP1352-1355, 11/17/2022, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
This case is the companion of C.Z. & S.Z., decided two weeks ago. C.Z. is the father of the four children at issue; S.Z., the appellant here, is the mother. The opinion here is pretty much a remix of the opinion in the earlier case; both parents raise similar issues and the court similarly rejects them.
COA rejects challenges to TPR
Portage County DH & HS v. C.Z & S.Z., 2022AP1249-1252; 11/3/2022, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
C.Z. appeals the termination of his parental rights to his four children. The court of appeals affirms.
CoA affirms finding that incarcerated mom is an unfit parent
State v. A.A.L., 2022AP1074, 10/11/22, District 1, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
A parent’s failure to meet the conditions for the return of her child due to her incarceration is not a constitutional basis for finding her an unfit parent during the grounds phase of a TPR proceeding. Kenosha County DHS v. Jodie W., 2006 WI 93, 293 Wis. 2d 530, 716 N.W.2d 845. “Alexis” argued that the circuit court violated this rule when it found grounds to terminate her rights to “Tom” based on continuing CHIPS and failure to assume parental responsibility. The court of appeals disagreed.
COA upholds TPR
Juneau County D.H.S. v. R.M., 2022AP1260, 9/29/22, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
R.M. appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son, M.M.
TPR order affirmed
State v. J.W., 2022AP1338, District 1, 10/4/22 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
J.W.’s challenges the sufficiency of the evidence at both the grounds and dispositional phases of the proceeding that terminated his parental rights to J.W., Jr. The court of appeals rejects his arguments.
Evidence at grounds hearing was sufficient to support termination of parental rights
Brown County DHS v. K.Y.T., 2022AP531, District 3, 9/27/22 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The county petitioned to terminate K.Y.T.’s parental rights to M.Z. alleging abandonment for both a 3-month and a 6-month period and failure to assume parental responsibility. The evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict that the county proved both grounds.
COA upholds TPR default judgment, unfitness finding, and termination
State v. D.T., 2022AP909, 8/23/22, District 1 (oen-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
D.T. showed up late for his Zoom TPR trial. It had been set for 9:00; D.T. appeared at 11:00 and said he was having eye trouble that kept him from logging in. The circuit court defaulted him and declined to vacate that default. The court of appeals affirms, noting that D.T. had missed other hearings.