Dept. of Human Services v. A. L. N.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
870 June 17, 2020 No. 309 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON In the Matter of M. C. N., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. A. L. N., Appellant. Jackson County Circuit Court 19JU02636; A173076 (Control) In the Matter of J. G. S.-N., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. A. L. N., Appellant. Jackson County Circuit Court 19JU02633; A173077 Timothy Barnack, Judge. Submitted May 1, 2020. George W. Kelly filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Rebecca M. Auten, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Mooney, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore. PER CURIAM Affirmed. Cite as 304 Or App 870 (2020) 871 PER CURIAM Mother appeals judgments terminating her parental rights to her two children, J and M, for reasons of unfitness, ORS 419B.504. Mother raises one assignment of error in which she contends that the juvenile court erred in terminating her parental rights. A detailed discussion of the evidence in the record in this case would not benefit the bench, bar, or public. Suffice it to say that, on de novo review, ORS 19.415(3)(a), we conclude that the record contains clear and convincing evidence that (1)\ mother has engaged in conduct or is characterized by conditions, most notably longterm substance abuse (methamphetamine and cannabis) and significant mental health disorders, that are seriously detrimental to the children; (2) integration of the children into mother’s care is improbable within a reasonable time because mother’s conduct and conditions are unlikely to change; and (3) termination is in the best interests of the children. ORS 419B.500; ORS 419B.504; State ex rel SOSCF v. Stillman, 333 Or 135, 145-46, 36 P3d 490 (2001). The juvenile court did not err in terminating mother’s parental rights for reasons of unfitness under ORS 419B.504. 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.
