T.F. v. State of Utah
Annotate this Case----ooOoo----
State of Utah, in the interest of
P.F. and M.F., persons under eighteen years of age.
______________________________
T.F.,
Appellant,
v.
State of Utah,
Appellee.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
Case No. 981689-CA
F I L E D
June 24, 1999
1999 UT App 204
-----
Third District Juvenile, Salt Lake
Department
The Honorable Robert S. Yeates
Attorneys:
John E. Laherty, Salt Lake City,
for Appellant
Jan Graham and Carol Verdoia, Salt
Lake City, for Appellee
Martha Pierce, Salt Lake City, Guardian
Ad Litem
-----
Before Judges Greenwood, Bench, and Billings.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant appeals from the juvenile court's order terminating her parental rights to P.F. and M.F. Her attorney filed an Anders-type brief pursuant to L.C. v. State, 963 P.2d 761 (Utah Ct. App. 1998) and abided by the requirements of that case including giving proper notice to T.F. and incorporating her suggestions. Counsel raised the following issues on T.F.'s behalf: 1) the juvenile court erred in allowing Dr. Steve's Szykula's testimony and psychological evaluation; 2) her trial counsel should have questioned Ken McCauley regarding the report he allegedly made to Workforce Services; and 3) the juvenile court should have concluded that T.F. had overcome her drug problem. However, after engaging "in sufficient analysis of the record and case law," counsel concluded that these issues are frivolous. Id. at 765 (citation omitted). Our independent analysis of the issues and the record lead us to the same conclusion. There was overwhelming evidence, including T.F.'s recent drug and psychological problems, to support the juvenile court's decision to terminate her parental rights.
Accordingly, we affirm the juvenile
court's termination order and allow T.F.'s counsel to withdraw.
______________________________
Pamela T. Greenwood,
Associate Presiding Judge
______________________________
Russell W. Bench, Judge
______________________________
Judith M. Billings, Judge
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.