In re T.L.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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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. COA14-23 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 17 June 2014 IN THE MATTER OF: T.L.F. M.D.F. Appeal Wilkes County Nos. 12 JT 88-89 by respondent-mother by writ of certiorari from order entered 26 September 2013 by Judge Michael D. Duncan in Wilkes County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 29 May 2014. Paul W. Freeman, Jr., for petitioner-appellee Wilkes County Department of Social Services. Mark Hayes, for respondent-appellant mother. Ivey, McClellan, Gatton & Talcott, L.L.P., (Chuck) M. Ivey, IV, for guardian ad litem. by Charles CALABRIA, Judge. Respondent-mother ( respondent ) appeals by writ of certiorari from the trial court s order terminating her parental rights to the juveniles T.L.F. and M.D.F. (collectively the -2juveniles ). appeal. The juveniles father is not a party to this We affirm. The Wilkes County Department of Social Services ( DSS ) first became involved with the family after reports of domestic violence and substance abuse. petitions alleging dependent. the In July 2012, DSS filed juvenile juveniles were abused, neglected, and The juveniles were adjudicated abused, neglected, and dependent in February 2013. After a permanency planning hearing, the trial court changed the juveniles permanent plan from reunification to adoption. In March 2013, DSS filed petitions respondent s parental rights to the juveniles. inter alia, that both children were to terminate DSS alleged, neglected and that respondent willfully abandoned them for at least six consecutive months immediately preceding the filing of the petition. In addition, respondent had committed a felony assault on another child who resided in the home. 1111(a)(1), (7)-(8) (2013). See N.C. Gen. Stat. ' 7B- After a hearing, the trial court entered an order concluding that grounds existed to terminate respondent s parental rights based on neglect, abandonment, and felony assault on another child. The trial court determined -3that termination of respondent s juveniles best interests. parental rights was in the Respondent appeals. On 6 February 2014, respondent filed a petition for writ of certiorari, acknowledging defects in her notice of appeal. the record cooperated indicates with that counsel s the parent efforts to desired give to proper When appeal notice and of appeal, this Court may exercise its discretion and issue a writ of certiorari to review orders terminating pursuant to N.C.R. App. P. 21(a)(1). parental rights In re I.T.P-L., 194 N.C. App. 453, 460, 670 S.E.2d 282, 285 (2008), disc. review denied, 363 N.C. 581, 681 S.E.2d 783 (2009). Because it appears from the record that respondent expressed her desire to appeal and cooperated with counsel s efforts to enter notice of appeal, we allow respondent s petition for writ of certiorari. Respondent s counsel has filed a no-merit brief pursuant to North Carolina Rule of Appellate Procedure 3.1(d) stating that, after thoroughly reviewing the trial record and transcript, he has concluded there is no meritorious argument on which to base an appeal. He requests examination of the case. this Court conduct an independent Counsel directs this Court s attention to potential issues regarding the trial court s consideration of the bond between the juveniles and their maternal grandmother as -4well as the grandmother trial as a court s possible consideration of placement. However, ultimately concedes that the trial discretion in terminating the maternal counsel court did not abuse its [respondent s] parental rights. Respondent has not filed her own written arguments. After reviewing the transcript and record, we are unable to find any possible prejudicial error in the trial court s order. The trial court s findings of fact support at least one ground for termination, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that termination is in the juveniles best interests. N.C. Gen. Stat. ยงยง 7B-1110, 7B-1111 (2013). Therefore, we affirm the order terminating respondent s parental rights. Affirmed. Judges STROUD and DAVIS 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.
