Gephardt v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2010 Ark. App. 674
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
CA 10-576
No.
Opinion Delivered October
6, 2010
BRENDA GEPHARDT
APPELLANT
V.
APPEAL FROM THE POLK
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. JV-07-47]
HONORABLE J.W. LOONEY, JUDGE
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF
HUMAN SERVICES
APPELLEE
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO BE
RELIEVED GRANTED
COURTNEY HUDSON HENRY, Judge
Appellant Brenda Gephardt appeals the order entered by the Polk County Circuit
Court terminating her parental rights in two of her children. On appeal, appellant’s attorney
has filed a motion to be relieved as counsel pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Ark. Dep’t of Human
Servs., 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Rule 6-9(i) of the Arkansas Rules of the
Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, asserting that there are no issues of arguable merit to
support an appeal. Counsel’s motion is accompanied by a brief listing all adverse rulings made
at the termination hearing and explaining why there is no meritorious ground for reversal.
The clerk of this court sent a copy of counsel’s motion and brief to appellant, informing her
of the right to file pro se points for reversal. Appellant chose not to file any pro se points on
appeal.
Cite as 2010 Ark. App. 674
Our review of the record reflects that appellant is the mother of six children. Only
two of them are at issue in this appeal: E.H., a daughter who was born on November 20,
1999; and J.H., a son who was born on January 11, 2004. The Arkansas Department of
Human Services (DHS) obtained emergency custody of these two children on October 26,
2007, while they were in the custody of their father. At that time, the children could not be
placed with appellant because her other children had entered foster care on grounds of failure
to protect, which stemmed from appellant’s marriage to a registered sex offender. In addition,
appellant was considered noncompliant with the case plan in that proceeding because she was
refusing to be tested for controlled substances. In any event, the circuit court declared E.H.
and J.H. to be dependent-neglected on November 26, 2007, and the goal of the case plan was
reunification with the father. However, the circuit court terminated the parental rights of the
father on January 5, 2009.
On December 3, 2009, two years after E.H. and J.H. were adjudicated dependentneglected, DHS petitioned for the termination of appellant’s parental rights.
At the
termination hearing held on March 1, 2010, the testimony revealed that appellant had not
been compliant with the case plan since June 2009. Appellant’s dwelling did not pass a home
study, and an effort to provide unsupervised visitation had failed. She and her husband had
not completed counseling, and appellant continued to fail or refuse to submit to drug testing.
Following the hearing, the circuit court found that termination was in the children’s best
-2-
Cite as 2010 Ark. App. 674
interest and that DHS had proven three grounds to support the termination of appellant’s
parental rights pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-27-341 (Supp. 2009).
After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we conclude that counsel has complied
with the requirements regarding no-merit appeals and that the appeal is wholly without merit.
Therefore, we grant counsel’s motion to be relieved and affirm the termination order.
Affirmed; motion granted.
G RUBER and B AKER, JJ., agree.
-3-
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.