Dept. of Human Services v. M. L. S./K. M.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 576 December 16, 2015 569 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON In the Matter of C. A. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. M. L. S., Appellant. Multnomah County Circuit Court 14JU01721; Petition Number 110701; A159219 (Control) In the Matter of P. R. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. M. L. S., Appellant. Multnomah County Circuit Court 14JU01723; Petition Number 110703; A159220 In the Matter of M. M. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. M. L. S., Appellant. Multnomah County Circuit Court 14JU01725; Petition Number 110703; A159221 570 Dept. of Human Services v. M. L. S./K. M. In the Matter of P. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. K. M., Appellant. Multnomah County Circuit Court 14JU01724; Petition Number 110703; A159364 In the Matter of M. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. K. M., Appellant. Multnomah County Circuit Court 14JU01726; Petition Number 110703; A159364 Jan Wyers, Judge. Merri Souther Wyatt, Judge. Submitted October 7, 2015. Megan L. Jacquot filed the brief for appellant K. M. Shannon Storey, Chief Defender, Juvenile Appellate Section, and Shannon Flowers, Deputy Public Defender, filed the brief for appellant M. L. S. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Paul L. Smith, Deputy Solicitor General, and Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Lagesen, Judge, and Wilson, Judge pro tempore. Cite as 275 Or App 569 (2015) 571 PER CURIAM Affirmed. 572 Dept. of Human Services v. M. L. S./K. M. PER CURIAM. In this consolidated appeal, mother and father appeal a juvenile court judgment terminating their parental rights to their children. Mother’s appeal relates to all three children, and father’s appeal relates only to the two youngest children. The juvenile court found that termination of mother and father’s parental rights was in the best interest of all three children under both ORS 419B.504 (“by reason of conduct or condition seriously detrimental to the child”) and ORS 419B.506 (“parents have failed or neglected without reasonable and lawful cause to provide for the basic physical and psychological needs of the child”). An extended discussion of the facts in this case would not benefit the bench, the bar, or the public. On de novo review, ORS 19.415(3)(a), we conclude that the juvenile court properly terminated mother and father’s parental rights for unfitness under ORS 419B.504. Given our disposition, we do not reach the merits of the juvenile court’s termination of parental rights on the alternative ground of neglect under ORS 419B.506. Affirmed.
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.
