On Point blog, page 5 of 26
COA affirms TPR jury verdict based on harmless error analysis
C.T.L. v. M.L.K., 2023AP402, District III, 7/11/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
The court of appeals confronts two alleged errors stemming from M.L.K.’s TPR jury trial and affirms based on harmless error.
SCOW reverses court of appeals and holds parent is unable to withdraw their plea, fails to agree on much of anything else
State v. A.G., 2023 WI 61, 6/30/23, reversing an unpublished decision of the court of appeals; case activity (briefs not available)
In a closely-watched appeal involving tricky questions regarding plea withdrawal in TPR cases, a fractured court agrees that the court of appeals got it wrong but fails to otherwise develop the law.
State sufficiently proved parent’s pleas were knowing, intelligent and voluntary despite possible misadvice in plea colloquy
State v. S.S., 2022AP1179 & 2022AP1180, District I, 6/7/23 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (briefs not available)
In yet another TPR appeal with a parent alleging a defective plea colloquy, the court of appeals finds that the State proved the plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary at a postdisposition hearing.
Admission of other-acts evidence at TPR grounds trial was harmless
Barron County DH & HS v. Q.B., 2023AP37, District 3, 6/13/23 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
At the trial to terminate the parental rights of Q.B. (“Quan”) on grounds of continuing CHIPS and failure to assume parental responsibility, a substance abuse counselor referred to Quan having spent “quite a bit of time incarcerated over the years” before the entry of the CHIPS order. (¶¶8-9, 24). The circuit court then declined to give a cautionary instruction. Assuming the evidence was inadmissible and that a cautionary instruction was appropriate, the error was harmless.
Defense Win! Missing one pre-trial TPR hearing not sufficient basis for default judgment
Kenosha County Division of Child and Family Services v. D.R.-R., 2022AP1812, 06/01/23, District 2 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
In what should not be a shocking outcome, a mother’s failure to appear at a single pre-trial hearing is not “egregious” and does not support a default judgment on grounds.
Termination of parental rights affirmed despite some missteps
Columbia County DHS v. K.D.K., 2022AP1835, 5/25/23, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
K.D.K. challenged an order terminating his parental rights to C.A.K. on 3 grounds: (1) the judge was not properly assigned to preside over his case; (2) the circuit court refused to give a special verdict question asking whether it had been impossible for K.D.K. to meet the conditions for return set forth in the CHIPS dispositional; and (3) trial counsel was ineffective in several respects. The court of appeals rejected all claims.
Defense Win! Invalid waiver of right to counsel results in reversal of TPR order
Winnebago County Department of Human Services v. N.J.D., 2023AP75, 05/03/2023 (District 2) (one-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
Presented with two strong bases to reverse, the court of appeals picks one and holds that because the record “fails to demonstrate that N.D. waived his right to counsel,” the order terminating his parental rights to his daughter is reversed. (Opinion, ¶1).
COA affirms default TPR against incarcerated dad
Price County v. T.L., 2022AP1678, 4/25/2023, District 3 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
The law governing default TPRs is messy. Click here. This decision makes it messier.
Defense win! “Serious felony against a child” finding reversed in TPR appeal
Brown County Department of Human Services v. S.K., 2023 WI App 27; case activity
A court has grounds to terminate parental rights under §48.415(9m) when the parent commits a “serious felony against a child.” Here, the circuit court found that grounds existed to terminate Stephanie’s parental rights to Robert because she had been convicted of child neglect resulting in death under but “as a party to the crime.” In a decision recommended for publication, the court of appeals reversed, but it rejected Stephanie’s argument that an “as a party to the crime” conviction can never qualify as a “serious felony.”
Dad’s criminal record appropriately admitted into evidence during grounds phase of TPR
State v. B.L., 2023AP8, 4/11/23, District 1 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
“Barry” appealed an order terminating his parental rights to his 4 1/2-year-old daughter, Alice. He argued that the circuit court erred in admitting his criminal history during the grounds phase and erred in finding that it was in Alice’s best interest to terminate his rights. He lost on both issues.