In re J.E.

Annotate this Case

The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the trial court terminating Mother's parental rights to her child, holding that the issues raised by counsel in Mother's brief lacked merit.

After hearings, the trial court entered an order terminating Father's parental rights on the grounds of neglect and willfully leaving the child in placement outside of the home for more than twelve months without showing reasonable progress to correct the conditions that led to his removal. Mother appealed. Counsel for Mother then filed a no-merit brief on Mother's behalf. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's order terminating Mother's parental rights, holding that the trial court's order was supported by clear, cogent and convincing evidence and was based on proper legal grounds.

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA No. 214A19 Filed 1 November 2019 IN THE MATTER OF: J.E. Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7B-1001(a1)(1) from an order entered on 25 February 2019 by Judge Jimmy Myers in District Court, Davie County. This matter was calendared in the Supreme Court on 4 October 2019 but was determined on the record and briefs without oral argument pursuant to Rule 30(f) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. No brief filed for petitioner-appellee Davie County Department of Social Services. Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP, by Stephen V. Carey, for Guardian ad Litem. Mary McCullers Reece for respondent-appellant mother. BEASLEY, Chief Justice. Respondent, the mother of J.E. (Jason)1, appeals from the trial court’s 25 February 2019 order terminating her parental rights. Respondent’s counsel has filed a no-merit brief pursuant to N.C. R. App. P. 3.1(e). We conclude that the issues identified by counsel in respondent’s brief lack merit and affirm the trial court’s order. 1 A pseudonym is used to protect the identity of the juvenile and for ease of reading. IN RE: J.E. Opinion of the Court The Davie County Department of Social Services (DSS) has been involved with respondent and her family since November 2016. On 18 November 2016, DSS received a child protective services report that Jason arrived at pre-school with a pill bottle containing twenty-four pills and labeled with respondent’s name. Upon further assessment, respondent reported to a social worker that she had an addiction issue and most recently used cocaine on 17 November 2016 while supervising Jason. Respondent also reported that on 22 November 2016, she and her boyfriend were involved in a domestic altercation while Jason was present. On 28 November 2016, DSS obtained nonsecure custody of Jason and filed a petition alleging that Jason was a neglected and dependent juvenile. Following an adjudication hearing held on 6 February 2017, the trial court entered an order adjudicating Jason as a neglected and dependent juvenile. On 10 October 2018, DSS filed a petition to terminate respondent’s parental rights on the grounds of neglect and willfully leaving Jason in placement outside of the home for more than twelve months without showing reasonable progress to correct the conditions that led to his removal. See N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(1)–(2) (2017). Following hearings held on 7 January and 4 February 2019, the trial court entered an order on 25 February 2019 terminating respondent’s parental rights on both grounds alleged by DSS. Respondent gave timely notice of appeal to this Court pursuant to N.C.G.S. §§ 7A-27(a)(5) and 7B-1001(a1)(1). -2- IN RE: J.E. Opinion of the Court Respondent’s counsel has filed a no-merit brief on behalf of respondent pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. Counsel has advised respondent of her right to file pro se written arguments on her own behalf with this Court, and counsel has provided respondent with the documents necessary to do so. Respondent has not submitted any written arguments. We independently review issues contained in a no-merit brief filed pursuant to appellate rule 3.1(e). In re L.E.M., 831 S.E.2d 341, 345 (N.C. 2019). Respondent’s counsel identified two issues that could arguably support an appeal but stated why she believed both of these issues lacked merit. Based upon our careful review of the issues identified in the no-merit brief in light of our consideration of the entire record, we are satisfied that the trial court’s 25 February 2019 order was based on “clear, cogent, and convincing evidence” supporting statutory grounds for termination of parental rights. See N.C.G.S. § 7B-1109(f). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order terminating respondent’s parental rights. AFFIRMED. -3-

Primary Holding

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's order terminating Mother's parental rights to her child, holding that the issues raised by counsel in Mother's brief lacked merit.

Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.

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.