NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES v. M.F.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-3731-04T43731-04T4

NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF YOUTH

AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

M.F.

Defendant-Appellant.

IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP

OF E.G.F., G.L., JR., E.L., A.L. AND

E.L.,

MINORS.

_____________________________________

 

Submitted September 14, 2005 - Decided

Before Judges Wecker, Fuentes and Graves.

On appeal from Superior Court of New

Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part,

Morris County, Docket No. FG-14-33-03.

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender,

attorney for appellant (Michael C. Kazer,

Designated Counsel, on the brief).

Peter C. Harvey, Attorney General, attorney

for respondent (Andrea M. Silkowitz, Assistant

Attorney General, of counsel; Deborah M.

Nolan, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender, attorney

for minors (Nancy E. Scott, Assistant Deputy

Public Defender, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Defendant M.F. appeals the judgment of guardianship that terminated her parental rights to five of her children and placed them under the guardianship of the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS). The children affected by this judgment are E.G., a twelve-year-old boy; G.L., Jr., a five-year-old boy; E.L., a three-year-old girl; A.L., a two-year-old boy; and E.L. a one-year-old girl.

Appellant argues that (1) DYFS violated its parens patriae responsibility by not filing the guardianship petition in a timely manner; and (2) DYFS failed to establish, by clear and convincing evidence, each of the four prongs of the test to terminate parental rights. We disagree and affirm.

In her thirty-eight years of life, M.F. has given birth to twelve children. All of the children have been removed from her custody at various points in their lives. M.F. has lived a highly dysfunctional life. She has admitted to using cocaine and marijuana and has been involved in relationships that have exposed some of the children to domestic violence.

The event that precipitated DYFS's intervention in this case occurred on November 18, 1999. On that date, the school nurse notified M.F. that E.G. had contracted chicken pox. M.F. left four of her children, between the ages of two and four years old, alone, while she went to pick up E.G. from school. In her absence, the children accidentally started a fire in the apartment. Neighbors rescued the children and M.F. was subsequently arrested. She remained incarcerated on this charge for over two months. From this point, M.F. has not had custody of any of her children.

Judge Critchley considered all of the evidence adduced at trial, including the testimony of the expert witnesses called by both sides, and rendered a carefully reasoned oral opinion covering thirty-two pages of transcript. Judge Critchley's opinion tracks the statutory requirements of N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1, in accordance with In re Guardianship of D.M.H., 161 N.J. 365 (1999), In re Guardianship of K.H.O., 161 N.J. 337 (1999) and New Jersey Div. of Youth and Family Servs. v. A.W., 103 N.J. 591 (1986), and is supported by the record. Rova Farms Resort, Inc. v. Investors Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474, 484 (1974). Therefore, his factual findings "'should not be disturbed unless they are so wholly insupportable as to result in a denial of justice.'" In re Guardianship of J.N.H., 172 N.J. 440, 472 (2002) (quoting In re Guardianship of J.T., 269 N.J. Super. 172, 188 (App. Div. 1993)).

We affirm for substantially the same reasons given by Judge Critchley in his January 28, 2005 oral opinion.

 

The court also terminated the parental rights of: (1) E.G, the legal father of the child E.G.; (2) H.P., the biological father of the child E.G.; and (3) G.L., Sr., the biological father of G.L., Jr., three-year-old E.L., A.L., and one-year-old E.L. None of these defendants have appealed the Family Part's termination order.

Although not entirely clear, a DYFS "Referral Response Report" indicates that M.F. may have been charged with the crime of third-degree endangering the welfare of a child. N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4. The record does not contain any indication as to the disposition of any charges filed. It is undisputed, however, that DYFS substantiated the allegations of abuse when it took custody of M.F.'s children.

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-3731-04T4

RECORD IMPOUNDED

September 22, 2005