T.J.W. v. State

T.J.W. v. State

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS

----ooOoo----

State of Utah, in the interest of T.W.H. and K.W., persons under eighteen years of age.

_____________________________

T.J.W.,

Appellant,

v.

State of Utah,

Appellee.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20030866-CA
 

F I L E D
(April 29, 2004)
 

2004 UT App 128

 

-----

Second District Juvenile, Ogden Department

The Honorable J. Mark Andrus

Attorneys: Randall W. Richards, Ogden, for Appellant

Mark L. Shurtleff and John M. Peterson, Salt Lake City, for Appellee

Martha Pierce and Cynthia L. Havlicek, Salt Lake City, Guardians Ad Litem

-----

Before Judges Bench, Davis, and Greenwood.

PER CURIAM:

T.J.W. (Father) appeals the termination of his parental rights. Father asserts on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in finding that termination was in the best interests of the children because there was no nexus between the findings of fact and the best interests of the children.(1)

In reviewing an order terminating parental rights, this court "will not disturb the juvenile court's findings and conclusions unless the evidence clearly preponderates against the findings as made or the court has abused its discretion." In re R.A.J., 1999 UT App 329,¶6, 991 P.2d 1118. Additionally, juvenile courts are given a "'wide latitude of discretion as to the judgments arrived at' based upon not only the court's opportunity to judge credibility firsthand, but also based on the juvenile court judges' 'special training, experience, and interest in this field.'" In re E.R., 2001 UT App 66,¶11, 21 P.3d 680 (citations omitted).

When evaluating whether to terminate parental rights, a court must make two distinct findings. First, the court must find that the parent is unfit or incompetent under any one of the grounds for termination under Utah Code section 78-3a-407. See Utah Code Ann. § 78-3a-407 (2002). Second, if grounds for termination are established, the court must find that termination is in the best interests of the children. See In re R.A.J., 1999 UT App 329 at ¶7. Both elements must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. See id.

Father challenges only the trial court's finding that termination would be in the best interests of the children. The trial court carefully and properly determined that termination was in the best interests of the children. After finding Father unfit, the trial court made "additional findings pursuant to Utah Code Section 78-3a-409 and 410" regarding the best interests of the children. Although Father argues there is no nexus between the findings and the conclusion, the nexus he seeks is actually provided in Utah Code sections 78-3a-409 and 78-3a-410.

Utah Code sections 78-3a-409 and 78-3a-410 require the court to evaluate specific factors in terminating parental rights where the subject children are not in the parent's custody and are in foster care with the goal of adoption by the foster family. See Utah Code Ann. §§ 78-3a-409, -410 (2002). The connection of the specified factors with the best interests of the children is plain. Trial courts must consider the current relationship between parent and child, the parent's efforts to maintain a relationship even without custody, the emotional ties and needs of the child, and the relationship between the foster family and child. See id. Consideration of the ability of the parent to provide for the child and meet the child's needs as compared to the ability of the foster family is also required. See id. § 78-3a-410(2). These considerations relate to the best interest of the child because they are evaluations of what placement will provide the child with the best, most stable, and safest environment, and what will best meet the emotional needs of the child.

The trial court noted in its findings of fact the continued instability of Father, the lack of a relationship between Father and the children, and the stability and integration of the children into their respective foster homes. These findings are consistent with the factors set forth in sections 78-3a-409 and 78-3a-410. Because there is a nexus between the findings of fact and the best interests of the children, Father's argument fails.

Father has not shown that the trial court abused its discretion in determining that termination of his parental rights was in the best interests of the children. Accordingly, the trial court's termination of Father's parental rights is affirmed.

______________________________

Russell W. Bench,

Associate Presiding Judge

______________________________

James Z. Davis, Judge

______________________________

Pamela T. Greenwood, Judge

1. Father also asserts on appeal that some findings of fact were clearly erroneous. Not only did he fail to marshal the facts in support of these findings, he also concedes that he was an unfit parent, thus making his challenge to these findings irrelevant.