In re S.T.F
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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA13-1408 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 17 June 2014 IN THE MATTER OF: Robeson County Nos. 10 J 217-20 S.T.F., J.T.F., A.T.F., A.T.F. Appeal by respondent-father from order entered 19 September 2013 by Judge Herbert L. Richardson in Robeson County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 19 May 2014. No brief filed for petitioner-appellee Department of Social Services. Robeson County Ryan McKaig for respondent-father. Sandlin Family Law guardian ad litem. Group, by Debra A. Griffiths, district court for BRYANT, Judge. Respondent-father appeals from a order terminating his parental rights to S.T.F., J.T.F., A.T.F., and A.T.F. challenging only the trial court s conclusion that it is in the best interests of the juveniles to terminate respondentfather s parental rights. We affirm. -2On Social 16 September Services 2010, ( DSS ) the Robeson obtained County nonsecure Department of custody of respondent-father s four children and filed juvenile petitions alleging that the children were neglected. The petitions alleged, inter alia, that respondent-father, his wife, and their children had no place to live and that the parents inadequate kinship placements for the children. 2011, DSS filed amended petitions alleging had On 5 April abuse. In an adjudication order filed on 29 August 2011,1 the trial court concluded that all four children were neglected and that S.T.F. was abused. In a separate disposition order, the trial court concluded that it was in the children s best interests to remain in DSS custody and continue with a permanent plan of reunification with the parents. On 20 June 2012, DSS filed parents rights to the children. petitions to terminate both Following a hearing on 12 September 2013, the trial court entered an order in which it found the existence of the following grounds for termination against respondent-father: progress; 1 and (2) (1) dependency. failure See N.C. to make Gen. reasonable Stat. § 7B- The order was amended on 13 September 2011, but the amendment made no substantive changes to the adjudication of neglect and abuse. -31111(a)(2), (6) (2011). The trial court also concluded that termination of respondent-father s parental rights was in the children s best interests. Respondent-father appeals.2 ____________________________ It is well-established that termination of parental rights proceedings involve a two-stage process: (1) the adjudication stage, where the petitioner is required to prove the existence of grounds for termination, and (2) the disposition stage, where the court considers the best interest of the juvenile. N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 7B-1110, -1111 (2013); In re White, 81 N.C. App. 82, 85, 344 S.E.2d 36, 38 (1986) (citation omitted). At the adjudication stage, the burden is upon the petitioner or movant and all findings of fact shall be based on clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1109 (f) (2013); see also In re Young, 346 N.C. 244, 247, 485 S.E.2d 612, 614 (1997) ( At the adjudication stage, the party petitioning for the termination must show by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that grounds authorizing the exist. (citation omitted)). not make any challenges to termination of parental rights On appeal, respondent-father does the adjudicatory stage of the proceedings. 2 The trial court also terminated the parental rights of the mother, but she is not a party to this appeal. -4Respondent-father challenges the trial court s conclusion that it is in the best interests of S.T.F., J.T.F., A.T.F., and A.T.F. to terminate his parental rights. Respondent-father contends that in light of the progress he has made, the desire he has expressed to be a good father, and the bond he has formed with his children, the trial court erred in terminating his parental rights. We review We disagree. the trial court s determination that a termination of parental rights is in the best interest of the juvenile for an abuse of discretion. In re Anderson, 151 N.C. App. 94, 98, 564 S.E.2d 599, 602 (2002) (citation omitted). While respondent-father s desire to make progress in the future is admirable, it is not dispositive at this stage of the termination proceeding. At the disposition stage, the trial court s focus is on the best interests of the child, not the circumstances surrounding the parents. 311 N.C. 101, 109, 316 S.E.2d See In re Montgomery, 246, 251 (1984) ( [T]he fundamental principle underlying North Carolina s approach to controversies involving child neglect and custody [is] that the best interest previously of stated the child that is the the polar child[ren] interests are at issue here, not star. ). and We [their] have best respondent s hopes for the -5future. In re Blackburn, 142 N.C. App. 607, 614, 543 S.E.2d 906, 911 (2001) (citation omitted). The trial disposition court s of its unchallenged order indicate findings that of S.T.F., fact in the A.T.F., and A.T.F. are in prospective adoptive placements and that DSS is looking at a family that may be interested in adopting J.T.F. Further, S.T.F., J.T.F., A.T.F., and A.T.F. are in a stable environment which environment and will allow benefit them to grow emotionally, up in a secure socially, and educationally. Upon review of the record, we conclude that the trial court weighed the evidence and made a reasoned decision that termination of respondent-father s parental rights was in the best interests of the children. We find no abuse of discretion in this determination and, therefore, affirm the order of the trial court terminating respondent-father s parental rights. Affirmed. Judges STEPHENS and DILLON concur. Report per Rule 30(e).
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.
