In The Matter Of: C.S.R., Jr., N.J.R., N.F.R
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. NO. COA11-684 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 4 October 2011 IN THE MATTER OF: Mecklenburg County Nos. 04 J 772-74 C.R., N.R. (I), N.R. (II) Appeal by respondent-father from orders entered 11 March 2011 by Judge District Court. Rickye McKoy-Mitchell in Mecklenburg County Heard in the Court of Appeals 12 September 2011. Richard A. Lucey, for petitioner-appellee. Deana K. Fleming, for guardian ad litem. Peter Wood, for respondent-appellant father. CALABRIA, Judge. Respondent-father appeals from three orders terminating his parental rights to his three children, N.R.(II) (collectively, the juveniles ).1 1 C.R., N.R.(I), and We affirm. The trial court also terminated the parental rights of the juveniles mother. She initially appealed from the trial court s orders, but withdrew her appeal on 30 June 2011. -2On 16 July 2004, the Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services ( DSS ) filed a juvenile petition alleging that the juveniles were neglected and dependent. DSS nonsecure custody of the juveniles on the same day. entered 30 juveniles August 2004, neglected and the trial dependent. court In a obtained In an order adjudicated subsequent the order entered 2 December 2004, the trial court granted guardianship of the juveniles to their maternal great aunt ( petitioner ). On 6 February 2007, petitioner filed petitions to adopt the juveniles. terminate On 30 November 2009, petitioner filed petitions to the parental rights mother of the juveniles. 10 February 2010. of respondent-father and the Petitioner filed amended petitions on Petitioner alleged the following grounds for termination against respondent-father: (1) neglect; (2) willful abandonment; and (3) failure to legitimate. Following hearings on 17 November 2010 and 27 January 2011, the trial court entered orders on 11 March 2011 concluding that all three grounds existed to terminate respondent-father s parental rights. trial court father s then parental juveniles. determined rights was that in termination the best of The respondent- interests of the Respondent-father appeals. Therefore, the juveniles mother is not a party to this appeal. -3Respondent-father s counsel has filed a no-merit brief on respondent-father s behalf in which counsel states that after a conscientious and thorough review of the Record on Appeal and all material in the underlying case files[,] he has concluded that this appeal presents no issue of merit on which to base an argument for relief and that the appeal is frivolous. In addition, counsel has shown to the satisfaction of this Court that he has advised respondent-father of his right to file written arguments with this Court, and counsel has provided him with the documents necessary to do so. Respondent-father has not filed his own written arguments. Pursuant to N.C.R. App. P. 3.1(d) (2010), counsel requests that this Court conduct an independent examination of the case. Counsel directs our attention to the following potential issues: (1) whether concluding the that trial there court were committed grounds to reversible terminate error in respondent- father s parental rights; (2) whether the trial court abused its discretion by terminating respondent-father s parental rights; and (3) whether the trial court jurisdiction to enter the orders. lacked subject matter However, counsel acknowledges that he is unable to set forth any issue of merit on which to base an argument for relief. -4After carefully reviewing the transcript and record in the instant case, we are unable to find any possible prejudicial error in the trial court s orders. The trial court s findings of fact support at least one ground for termination, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that termination was Furthermore, we in the best conclude that interests the jurisdiction to enter the orders. that the trial court properly court the had subject matter respondent-father s The trial court s order is affirmed. Affirmed. Chief Judge MARTIN and Judge McGEE concur. Report per Rule 30(e). juveniles. Accordingly, we determine terminated parental rights to the juveniles. of
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.
