Amanda v. ADES, Liberty R.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES. See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24 DIVISION ONE FILED: 02/01/2011 RUTH WILLINGHAM, ACTING CLERK BY: GH IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE AMANDA R., ) ) Appellant. ) v. ) ) ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC ) SECURITY, LIBERTY R., ) ) Appellees. ) ) No. 1 CA-JV 10-0191 DEPARTMENT A MEMORANDUM DECISION (Not for Publication Ariz. R.P. Juv. Ct. 103(G); ARCAP 28) Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County Cause No. JD 508174 The Honorable Peter Thompson, Judge AFFIRMED Thomas A. Vierling Attorney for Appellant Mother Thomas Horne, Arizona Attorney General By Eric Devany Attorneys for Appellee Phoenix Mesa H A L L, Judge ¶1 Amanda R. (Mother) appeals the juvenile court s order severing her parental rights to Liberty R. follow, we affirm. For the reasons that FACTUAL1 AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 Mother is the biological mother of Liberty, born on June 26, 2009. On September 23, 2009, Mother was arrested for possession of marijuana and felony child endangerment. At the time of Mother s arrest, Mother, biological father,2 and Liberty were living in a motel. According to the arresting officers, the motel room was filthy, with dirty clothes, dog feces, and food wrappers strewn about. ¶3 Following Mother s arrest, Liberty was taken into custody by Child Protective Services (CPS) and transported to Scottsdale Osborn Hospital for examination. The attending pediatrician concluded that Liberty was malnourished and opined that she was neglected. Although Mother had tested positive for marijuana only at the time of Liberty s birth, the pediatrician also noted that Liberty presented as a child that had been exposed to methamphetamine. ¶4 On September 28, 2009, the Arizona Department of Economic Security (ADES) filed a dependency petition alleging that Liberty is a dependent child as to Mother due to Mother s substance abuse, neglect, housing instability, and mental 1 We review the evidence and draw all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to upholding the juvenile court s factual findings. Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep t of Econ. Sec., 203 Ariz. 278, 282, ¶ 13, 53 P.3d 203, 207 (App. 2002). 2 Biological father s parental rights were also severed, but he has not challenged that severance in this appeal. 2 health. On November 5, 2009, the juvenile court found Liberty dependent as to Mother and CPS offered Mother numerous services, including parent-aide assessment, and classes, treatment, substance supervised abuse testing, visitation, and psychological evaluation. ¶5 On April 23, 2010, ADES petitioned to terminate the parent-child relationship between Mother and Liberty. The motion to terminate alleged that: (1) Liberty, a child under three years of age, has been in an out-of-home placement for a cumulative period of six months or longer pursuant to court order and Mother has substantially neglected or wilfully refused to remedy the circumstances causing the out-of-home placement; and (2) Mother is unable to discharge her parental responsibilities because of a history of chronic drug abuse and there are reasonable grounds to believe that the condition will continue for a prolonged and indeterminate period. ¶6 On July 27, 2010, the juvenile court held a pretrial conference on the motion for termination. Despite numerous notices that the court could proceed with termination should she fail to appear for any scheduled hearings, Mother did not attend the conference. any contact Mother s attorney stated that she had not had with Mother since the previous hearing, approximately one month before, and that her attempt to reach Mother by mail was unsuccessful. 3 ¶7 The juvenile court then proceeded with the termination hearing. The testified that Sieczkowski assigned case also Mother s some services, noncompliant. hearing, current testified sporadic and unreliable. but manager, Marilyn whereabouts that Mother s Sieczkowski, are behavior unknown. has been Mother has, at times, participated in overall she has been uncooperative and Sieczkowski testified that, as of the date of the Mother had not participated approximately four months. in drug testing for She participated minimally in drug counseling, but denied having ever used drugs, notwithstanding Liberty testing positive for marijuana exposure at birth and Mother s arrest for possession of marijuana. Mother failed to participate in parent-aide classes and missed numerous scheduled visits with Liberty. Sieczkowski opined that Mother is unable to discharge her parental responsibilities due to chronic drug abuse and that Mother has substantially neglected or wilfully refused to remedy the circumstances that have caused Liberty s out-of-home placement. Finally, Sieczkowski also opined that Liberty is an adoptable child and that severance is in her best interest. ¶8 that At the close of the hearing, the juvenile court found the State had proven both alleged statutory bases for termination and that termination was in Liberty s best interest. Mother timely appealed. We have 4 jurisdiction under Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) sections 8-235 (2007) and 12-120.21 (2003) and Arizona Rule of Procedure for the Juvenile Court 103(a). DISCUSSION ¶9 The juvenile relationship evidence only upon demonstrates severance and court that may terminate finding at a that least clear one preponderance the parent-child and statutory of the severance is in the child s best interest. convincing ground evidence for shows A.R.S. § 8-533(B) (Supp. 2010); Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279, 284, ¶ 22, 110 P.3d 1013, 1018 (2005). The juvenile court is in the best position to weigh the evidence, observe the parties, judge the credibility of witnesses and make appropriate findings, Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep t of Econ. Sec., 203 Ariz. 278, 280, ¶ 4, 53 P.3d 203, unless 205 the factual (App. juvenile findings 2002), and court abused [that] are we will its clearly affirm the discretion erroneous[;] judgment by making that unless there is no reasonable evidence to support them. is, Audra T. v. Ariz. Dep t of Econ. Sec., 194 Ariz. 376, 377, ¶ 2, 982 P.2d 1290, juvenile 1291 court (App. will be 1998) (citations deemed to necessary to support the judgment. have omitted). made every [T]he finding Maricopa County Juv. Action No. JS-8287, 171 Ariz. 104, 111, 828 P.2d 1245, 1252 (App. 1991) (citations omitted). 5 ¶10 First, Mother contends that the juvenile court erred by terminating her parental rights under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(b) (Supp. 2010) because there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that she had substantially neglected or wilfully refused to remedy the circumstances that caused Liberty, a child under the age of three, to be in an out-of-home placement for six months or longer. Specifically, she asserts that she was not provided sufficient time and services to allow her to remedy the circumstances. ¶11 Before We disagree. parental rights may be severed pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(b), ADES must provide parents with the time and opportunity to participate in programs designed to help [them] become [] effective parent[s]. In re Maricopa County Juv. Action No. JS-501904, 180 Ariz. 348, 353, 884 P.2d 234, 239 (App. 1994). ADES is not required, however, to provide every conceivable service, or one that would be futile. See Mary Ellen C. v. Ariz. Dep t of Econ. Sec., 193 Ariz. 185, 192, ¶¶ 34, 37, 971 P.2d 1046, 1053 (App. 1999). ¶12 with Here, the record reflects that ADES provided Mother numerous services, but her participation was minimal. Although Mother consented to a psychological evaluation and an initial substance abuse assessment, she was not forthcoming and denied having refused to ever used acknowledge illegal her substances. drug 6 use, the Because Mother substance-abuse counseling services. program declined to offer her any additional Sieczkowski attempted to obtain additional counseling services for Mother, but Mother failed to participate. Mother only entire submitted to four urinalysis tests during the dependency, and the eighteen missed tests are deemed positive. Mother s participation visitation was in sporadic parent-aide and she classes repeatedly without providing any contact information. and left scheduled the State Indeed, at the time of the termination hearing, Mother s whereabouts were unknown both to ADES and her attorney. Mother does not identify, and our not review of the record does reveal, any evidence to suggest that Mother may have been motivated or able to remedy the circumstances had ADES afforded her more time or provided her more services. Therefore, the juvenile court did not err by finding the State proved this statutory ground with clear and convincing evidence.3 ¶13 Next, Mother argues that the juvenile court erred by terminating her parental rights because there was insufficient 3 Because we find the State proved a statutory basis for termination pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(b), we need not address Mother s alternative claim that there was insufficient evidence to support the juvenile court s additional finding that Mother s history of chronic substance abuse renders her unable to discharge her parental responsibilities pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(3). See Jesus M., 203 Ariz. at 280, 53 P.3d at 205 (citation omitted). 7 evidence to support a finding that severance was in Liberty s best interest. ¶14 Again, we disagree. The juvenile court must make a finding as to how the child would benefit from a severance or be harmed by the continuation of the [parental] relationship when considering the child s best interest. Maricopa County Juv. Action No. JS- 500274, 167 Ariz. 1, 5, 804 P.2d 730, 734 (1990) (citations omitted) (emphasis in original). Evidence that a child is adoptable supports a finding that severance is in a child s best interest. Maricopa County Juv. Action No. JS-501904, 180 Ariz. 348, 352, 884 P.2d 234, 238 (App. 1994). ¶15 very In this case, Sieczkowski testified that Liberty, a young child, is adoptable and that termination parent-child relationship is in her best interest. record contains sufficient evidence to support the of the Thus, the juvenile court s finding that severance is in the child s best interest. 8 CONCLUSION ¶16 For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the juvenile court s order severing Mother s parental rights to Liberty. __/s/_____________________________ PHILIP HALL, Presiding Judge CONCURRING: _/s/_______________________________ JON W. THOMPSON, Judge _/s/_______________________________ LAWRENCE F. WINTHROP, Judge 9

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.