MATTER OF DECLARING T E R

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 14286 IN THE SUPREME (BURT O THE STATE O MONTANA F F 1978 IN THE MATTER OF DMILARING T.E.R. Youth in Need of Care. Appeal fram: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Tenth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable LRRoy L. McKimn, Judge presiding. r : Counsel of m d For Appellant: William E. Berger argued, Lewistown, Montana For Respondent: Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, H e l e n a , Montana W i l l i a m Spoja, Jr. , County Attorney, Ledstawn, I%ntana Timothy O'Hare, Deputy County Attorney, argued, Lewistown, Montana K. M b e r t Foster argued, Lewistown, Montana Skmitted: Decided: Filed : PFp 979 November 21, 1978 FEi3 i, * 79'79 M r . J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. T h i s i s an a p p e a l by t h e p a r e n t s of a minor c h i l d from a judgment and o r d e r e n t e r e d October 1 7 , 1977, i n t h e Youth Court of t h e Tenth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Fergus County, t h e Honorable LeRoy L. McKinnon p r e s i d i n g . c l a r e d T.E.R. The judgment de- t o be a Youth i n Need of C a r e and awarded permanent custody of T.E.R. t o t h e Department of S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s of t h e S t a t e of Montana (SRS) w i t h a u t h o r i t y t o consent t o her adoption. O October 29, 1975, James Longin, t h e p r i n c i p a l a t n T.E.R.'s s c h o o l , n o t i f i e d Roberta Knopp, a c h i l d w e l f a r e caseworker, t h a t T.E.R. might be t h e v i c t i m of c h i l d abuse. Subsequent t o h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n , M s . Knopp o f f e r e d " p r o t e c - t i v e s e r v i c e s " which c o n s i s t e d of r e g u l a r v i s i t s t o t h e c h i l d ' s home. Over t h e c o u r s e of t h e n e x t y e a r and a h a l f , s h e maintained c o n t a c t w i t h T.E.R., n o t i c i n g , on o c c a s i o n , a number of b r u i s e s which s h e s u s p e c t e d t o be t h e r e s u l t of some abuse. Among o t h e r t h i n g s , testimony i n d i c a t e d t h a t T.E.R. b r i g h t f o r her age b u t n o t w e l l adjusted. is I n February 1977, s h o r t l y b e f o r e h e r t w e l f t h b i r t h d a y and w h i l e a t t e n d i n g t h e f o u r t h g r a d e , s h e e x h i b i t e d t h i s poor a d j u s t m e n t by damaging two c e i l i n g t i l e s i n a restroom a t h e r s c h o o l . p r i n c i p a l , who had been working w i t h T.E.R. The s c h o o l ' s and h e r p a r e n t s p e r i o d i c a l l y f o r two y e a r s , wrote h e r p a r e n t s d e t a i l i n g t h e i n c i d e n t and suggested c e r t a i n changes i n t h e i r t r e a t m e n t of T.E.R. A few weeks a f t e r t h i s i n c i d e n t , M s . T.E.R. Knopp p l a c e d i n 2 4 hour day c a r e because h e r s t e p f a t h e r had been h o s p i t a l i z e d and h e r mother was working o u t s i d e t h e home a t a j o b which r e q u i r e d h e r p r e s e n c e 2 4 h o u r s e a c h day. After a month had p a s s e d under t h i s a r r a n g e m e n t , M s . Knopp t o l d T.E.R. t h a t s h e would b e t a k i n g h e r back home s h o r t l y . T.E.R. r e a c t e d t o t h i s s u g g e s t i o n w i t h some a l a r m a n d , a f t e r some p r o d d i n g , t o l d M s . Knopp of r e c e n t i n c i d e n t s of s e x u a l a b u s e by h e r s t e p f a t h e r . The i n c i d e n t s had a l l e g e d l y i n - c r e a s e d i n f r e q u e n c y s i n c e h e r mother had t a k e n t h e job which k e p t h e r away from t h e f a m i l y home. On Monday, A p r i l 1 5 , 1977, two d a y s a f t e r t h e i r t a l k , M s . Knopp took T.E.R. examination. t o a d o c t o r who performed a p e l v i c The d o c t o r t o l d M s . Knopp t h a t t h e r e was e v i d e n c e o f s e x u a l c o n t a c t and M s . Knopp immediately p l a c e d T.E.R. i n a f o s t e r home i n Harlowton, Montana. One week l a t e r , on Monday, A p r i l 22, 1977, t h e d e p u t y c o u n t y a t t o r n e y f o r F e r g u s County, f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r y o u t h h e a r i n g , a l l e g i n g t h a t T.E.R. w a s a y o u t h i n need of s u p e r v i s i o n b e c a u s e of t h e F e b r u a r y i n c i d e n t a t s c h o o l and b e c a u s e s h e was " h a b i t u a l l y d i s o b e d i e n t and beyond p a r e n t a l c o n t r o l " . On May 4 , 1977, a h e a r i n g was h e l d a t which T.E.R. was r e p r e s e n t e d by a n a t t o r n e y , t h e S t a t e was r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e d e p u t y c o u n t y a t t o r n e y , and T . E . R . ' s themselves. parents represented On motion of t h e a t t o r n e y r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e c h i l d , t h e p e t i t i o n w a s o r a l l y amended t o i n c l u d e a l l e g a t i o n s t h a t T.E.R. w a s a y o u t h i n need o f care. T.E.R. gave h e r s t a t e m e n t i n chambers, o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of h e r parents. While s h e w a s t e s t i f y i n g , h e r s t e p f a t h e r appar- e n t l y s u f f e r e d a h e a r t a t t a c k and w a s t a k e n t o t h e h o s p i t a l . A t that time, t h e d e p u t y c o u n t y a t t o r n e y moved t h a t t h e h e a r i n g b e c o n t i n u e d u n t i l t h e S t a t e c o u l d f i l e a n amended p e t i t i o n i n s e r t i n g t h e c h a r g e t h a t T.E.R. w a s a youth i n need of care and have t h e amended p e t i t i o n s s e r v e d on a l l parties. T h i s w a s done on J u n e 2, 1977. Subsequent h e a r i n g s , on J u l y 7 and August 4 , p r i m a r i l y a d d r e s s e d a l l e g a t i o n s of p h y s i c a l and s e x u a l abuse by T . E . R . ' ~ stepfather. T.E.R.'s s t e p f a t h e r denied t h e s e a l l e g a t i o n s a n d , through h i s a t t o r n e y , a t t e m p t e d t o prove t h a t T.E.R. had a r e p u t a t i o n f o r u n t r u t h f u l n e s s and t h a t i f s h e had been s e x u a l l y a c t i v e , i t would have been w i t h neighborhood boys. On a p p e a l t h e p a r e n t s p r e s e n t f o u r i s s u e s f o r o u r consideration. 1. They c a n b e summarized and s t a t e d a s f o l l o w s : Whether t h e Youth Court e r r e d i n a l l o w i n g t h e c h i l d t o t e s t i f y o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of h e r p a r e n t s a s t o t h e a l l e g e d s e x u a l and p h y s i c a l abuse by h e r s t e p f a t h e r . 2. Whether t h e Youth Court abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n making a f i n d i n g of s e x u a l abuse based p r i m a r i l y on t h e c h i l d ' s d i s p u t e d testimony. 3. Whether t h e Youth C o u r t e r r e d by c o n s i d e r i n g T . E . R . ' s r e p o r t c a r d s , s u b m i t t e d s u b s e q u e n t t o t h e h e a r i n g by t h e Department of S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s . 4. Whether t h e S t a t e followed p r o p e r p r o c e d u r e s i n t a k i n g T.E.R. i n t o c u s t o d y and m a i n t a i n i n g c u s t o d y pending t h e Youth C o u r t ' s u l t i m a t e d e t e r m i n a t i o n on t h e p e t i t i o n a l l e g i n g h e r t o be a youth i n need of c a r e . T.E.R. t e s t i f i e d on two o c c a s i o n s ; b o t h t i m e s s h e was p e r m i t t e d t o t e s t i f y o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of h e r p a r e n t s . On t h e f i r s t o c c a s i o n , a t t h e May 4 h e a r i n g , s h e was quest i o n e d by t h e a t t o r n e y a p p o i n t e d t o r e p r e s e n t h e r and by t h e I t was w h i l e t h i s t e s t i m o n y was d e p u t y county a t t o r n e y . being given t h a t T.E.R.'s stepfather suffered a heart attack i n t h e courtroom where h e was w a i t i n g w i t h T . E . R . ' s The second t i m e T.E.R. hearing. mother. was q u e s t i o n e d was a t t h e ~ u l y 7 On t h a t o c c a s i o n t h e a t t o r n e y f o r t h e p a r e n t s was g i v e n t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o cross-examine. The p a r e n t s a r g u e t h a t t h e a l l e g a t i o n s made by T.E.R. i n t h e c o u r s e of h e r testimony amounted t o c h a r g i n g h e r s t e p f a t h e r w i t h c r i m i n a l conduct and t h a t he was t h e r e f o r e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y e n t i t l e d t o confront h i s accuser. not agree. W do e A t t h e o u t s e t i t should be noted t h a t a " p e t i - t i o n a l l e g i n g abuse, n e g l e c t , o r dependency i s a c i v i l a c t i o n brought i n t h e name of t h e s t a t e of Montana. S e c t i o n 10-1310(3), R.C.M. MCA. . ." 1947, now s e c t i o n 41-3-401(3) The o v e r r i d i n g p o l i c y which u n d e r l i e s a l l a c t i o n s i n v o l v i n g p o t e n t i a l l y abused c h i l d r e n i s " t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n of c h i l d r e n whose h e a l t h and w e l f a r e a r e a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d and f u r t h e r t h r e a t e n e d by t h e conduct of t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r c a r e and p r o t e c t i o n . " 1303, R.C.M. 1947, now s e c t i o n 41-3-101(2) S e c t i o n 10MCA. Under c i r c u m s t a n c e s such a s t h o s e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , i t may be n e c e s s a r y f o r a c h i l d ' s testimony t o be t a k e n o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of " t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r c a r e and p r o t e c t i o n . " W t h e r e f o r e hold t h a t a c h i l d may t e s t i f y e o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of h i s p a r e n t s i n a c a s e i n v o l v i n g a l l e g a t i o n s of abuse and n e g l e c t , s u b j e c t t o cross-examinat i o n by t h e p a r e n t s ' a t t o r n e y , when t h e p r e s i d i n g judge d e t e r m i n e s t h a t i t i s t h e most l i k e l y method of d i s c o v e r i n g t h e whole t r u t h a s t o t h e a l l e g e d abuse o r n e g l e c t . The n e x t i s s u e p r e s e n t e d r e f e r s t o t h e c o u r t ' s F i n d i n g of F a c t No. 1 2 : "12. That youth, and t i o n s with was n o t i n the has her the step-father has fondled t h e s a i d attempted t o have s e x u a l r e l a on many o c c a s i o n s when t h e mother home." The p a r e n t s a r g u e t h a t t h e judge e r r e d i n making such a f i n d i n g i n l i g h t of testimony adduced a t t h e h e a r i n g t h a t T.E.R. h a s l i e d a t t i m e s t o avoid punishment and t h a t s h e does n o t wish t o l i v e w i t h h e r s t e p f a t h e r . However, our r e v i e w of t h e t e s t i m o n y d o e s n o t r e v e a l t h a t t h e Youth C o u r t c l e a r l y abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n a r r i v i n g a t t h i s d e t e r m i n a tion. Where t e s t i m o n y i s d i r e c t l y c o n f l i c t i n g w e presume t h a t t h e j u d g e ' s f i n d i n g s a r e c o r r e c t b e c a u s e he w a s p r e s e n t when t h e t e s t i m o n y was g i v e n and had t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o o b s e r v e t h e demeanor of t h e w i t n e s s e s . Mobile Home Transp. 523, 526. H e l l i c k s o n v. B a r r e t t ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 1 6 1 Mont. 455, 460, 507 P.2d A s a r e s u l t , w e do n o t f i n d t h a t t h e Youth C o u r t abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n making a f i n d i n g o f s e x u a l a b u s e based p r i m a r i l y on t h e c h i l d ' s d i s p u t e d t e s t i m o n y . The p a r e n t s ' t h i r d i s s u e c o n c e r n s T . E . R . ' s school r e p o r t c a r d which w a s s u b m i t t e d t o t h e judge f o r h i s cons i d e r a t i o n some t i m e a f t e r t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e August 4 hearing. I n f a c t he d i d n o t r e c e i v e t h e r e p o r t c a r d u n t i l sometime i n October. A s evidence, t h e r e p o r t card f a l l s w i t h i n Rule 8 0 3 ( 6 ) , Mont.R.Evid., which e x c e p t s r e c o r d s o f r e g u l a r l y conducted a c t i v i t y from t h e h e a r s a y p r o h i b i t i o n . The f a c t t h a t t h e r e p o r t c a r d was b r o u g h t t o t h e j u d g e ' s a t t e n t i o n a f t e r t h e c o n c l u s i o n of t h e h e a r i n g i s somewhat d i s t u r b i n g b u t d o e s n o t amount t o r e v e r s i b l e e r r o r . First, t h e r e p o r t card w a s n o t i n existence a t t h e time t h e hearing concluded. Second, t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h e c h i l d r e q u i r e some d e g r e e of f l e x i b i l i t y i n p r o c e d u r e t o i n s u r e t h a t a l l e v i d e n c e p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h e c h i l d may b e c o n s i d e r e d . I n addition, counsel f o r t h e parents knew o f t h i s r e p o r t c a r d and h a s n e v e r q u e s t i o n e d i t s a u t h e n ticity. W f i n d under t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of t h e i n s t a n t e c a s e t h a t t h e Youth C o u r t d i d n o t err i n c o n s i d e r i n g T . E . R . ' s r e p o r t card. The f i n a l i s s u e r a i s e d by t h e p a r e n t s c o n c e r n s t h e p r o c e d u r e by which T.E.R. w a s t a k e n from h e r home by Ms. Knopp, t h e caseworker from SRS. What d i d n o t a p p e a r from t h e r e c o r d a s i t was s u b m i t t e d t o t h i s C o u r t , b u t what h a s been made a p a r t of t h e r e c o r d p u r s u a n t t o s t i p u l a t i o n of t h e p a r t i e s d u r i n g o r a l argument, i s t h a t a p r o c e e d i n g w a s h e l d on ~ p r i 2 0 , 1977. l A t t h a t t i m e T.E.R.'s mother a g r e e d t o t h e s h e l t e r c a r e arrangement proposed by M s . Knopp, t o b e implemented pending d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h i s matter by t h e Youth C o u r t . T.E.R.'s Thus, t o p r e v e n t any p o s s i b l e embarrassment t o p a r e n t s , t h e p a r t i e s t h e n proceeded p u r s u a n t t o t h e s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g y o u t h s i n need of s u p e r v i s i o n r a t h e r t h a n y o u t h s i n need of c a r e . I n i t i a l l y , t h i s had t h e e f f e c t o f e s t a b l i s h i n g f o r t h e s t e p f a t h e r a prima f a c i e showing o f d e n i a l o f due p r o c e s s . A t t h e May 4 h e a r i n g , he had o n l y r e c e i v e d n o t i c e t h a t a l l e g a t i o n s had been made t h a t T.E.R. w a s a y o u t h i n need o f s u p e r v i s i o n . of t h e p a r t i e s , however, w a s t h a t T.E.R. need of c a r e b e c a u s e o f s e x u a l a b u s e . The t r u e c o n c e r n m i g h t be a y o u t h i n Had t h e s t e p f a t h e r n o t suffered a h e a r t a t t a c k during t h a t hearing, the S t a t e may n o t have had a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o c u r e t h e a l l e g e d d e f e c t s w i t h r e s p e c t t o due process p r i o r t o a f i n a l determination by t h e Youth C o u r t . But s u b s e q u e n t t o t h a t h e a r i n g , t h e s t e p f a t h e r had been a p p r i s e d of t h e t r u e n a t u r e of t h e a l l e g a t i o n s i n v o l v e d i n t h e case. He was g i v e n t h e oppor- t u n i t y t o t e s t i f y , and h e w a s r e p r e s e n t e d by c o u n s e l . In a d d i t i o n , h e was a b l e t h r o u g h h i s c o u n s e l t o cross-examine T.E.R. with respect t o her allegations. T h e r e f o r e , though t h e p r o c e d u r e s i n v o l v e d i n t h i s c a s e w e r e h i g h l y u n u s u a l and n o t condoned by t h i s C o u r t , w e f i n d t h a t T . E . R . ' s was u l t i m a t e l y a f f o r d e d d u e p r o c e s s . stepfather Beyond t h a t , however, something more s t a n d s o u t . These proceedings focused p r i m a r i l y on a l l e g a t i o n s of improper conduct on t h e p a r t of t h e s t e p f a t h e r . These a l l e g a t i o n s were found t o be supported by a preponderance of t h e e v i dence, and t h e Youth Court was t h e r e f o r e c o r r e c t i n f i n d i n g T.E.R.'s s t e p f a t h e r t o be "an u n f i t person t o have c u s t o d y ; t h a t by r e a s o n of h i s dominance i n t h e f a m i l y t h e youth i s unable t o avoid h i s abuse." However, a c a r e f u l review of t h e r e c o r d does n o t r e v e a l t h a t t h e Youth C o u r t a d e q u a t e l y c o n s i d e r e d t h e r i g h t s of T.E.R.'s mother i n awarding permanent custody of T.E.R. SRS w i t h a u t h o r i t y t o c o n s e n t t o h e r a d o p t i o n . to In addition t o t h e i r r i g h t s as a c o u p l e , p a r e n t s may have i n d i v i d u a l r i g h t s w i t h respect t o t h e i r children. The r e c o r d i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e r e v e a l s t h a t t h e m o t h e r ' s r i g h t s were a f f o r d e d no more t h a n s u p e r f i c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Therefore, t h e o r d e r of t h e Youth Court i s v a c a t e d t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t applies t o T.E.R.'s mother, and t h e c a s e i s remanded t o t h e Youth C o u r t f o r f u r t h e r proceedings t o determine t h e f u t u r e s t a t u s of t h e m o t h e r ' s p a r e n t a l r i g h t s . W concur: e U 7&',4, &&,,&&q Chief J u s t i c e

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.