S.N.W. v. M.D.F.H.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 05/13/2013 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013 2120120 S.N.W. v. M.D.F.H. Appeal from M a r s h a l l J u v e n i l e Court (JU-12-300004.01) MOORE, J u d g e . S.N.W. ("the f a t h e r " ) appeals from a judgment o f the M a r s h a l l J u v e n i l e C o u r t ("the j u v e n i l e c o u r t " ) t e r m i n a t i n g h i s p a r e n t a l r i g h t s t o D.W. ("the c h i l d " ) . 2120120 Procedural V.W.H., t h e History child's stepfather, filed a petition M a r s h a l l Probate Court to adopt the c h i l d . i n t e r l o c u t o r y order ("the mother") proceedings of a d o p t i o n , filed to a the juvenile obtaining termination the c h i l d . The February to transfer for the and M.D.F.H. the adoption purposes of of the p a r e n t a l r i g h t s of the f a t h e r mother then f i l e d a p e t i t i o n t o t e r m i n a t e f a t h e r ' s p a r e n t a l r i g h t s and on stepfather court the A f t e r r e c e i v i n g an the motion in 22, 2012, and the f a t h e r answered the did not object to the to the petition motion to t r a n s f e r or o t h e r w i s e c o n t e s t the j u r i s d i c t i o n of the j u v e n i l e court. After a t r i a l , on O c t o b e r 2, 2012, On O c t o b e r 10, The terminating 2012, the entered a judgment the f a t h e r ' s p a r e n t a l father f i l e d to enter rights. a postjudgment motion. an o r d e r on O c t o b e r 25, d e n y i n g t h a t m o t i o n ; h o w e v e r , t h e m o t i o n had b e e n d e n i e d by o p e r a t i o n of j u v e n i l e court j u v e n i l e court purported 2012, R. the Juv. P. o f law On on O c t o b e r 24, O c t o b e r 29, 2012, 2012. the See Rule 1(B), father f i l e d his Ala. notice appeal. Facts At the t r i a l , had filed a the p a r t i e s s t i p u l a t e d t h a t the petition to adopt 2 the child in the stepfather Marshall 2120120 P r o b a t e C o u r t and t h a t an i n t e r l o c u t o r y o r d e r f o r a d o p t i o n h a d been e n t e r e d . January 13, presence 2002, the of the c h i l d County. severe The p a r t i e s a l s o s t i p u l a t e d t h a t , on o r a b o u t father stabbed at a v i s i t a t i o n the mother exchange i n the i n Jackson They f u r t h e r s t i p u l a t e d t h a t t h e m o t h e r h a d s u f f e r e d t r a u m a as a r e s u l t o f h e r i n j u r i e s medical expenses i n excess incident. o f $79,000 and h a d incurred as a r e s u l t o f that The p a r t i e s s t i p u l a t e d f u r t h e r t h a t t h e f a t h e r h a d been a r r e s t e d on c h a r g e s o f a t t e m p t e d m u r d e r and f i r s t - d e g r e e d o m e s t i c v i o l e n c e , b u t had s u b s e q u e n t l y been c o n v i c t e d o f o n l y f i r s t - d e g r e e domestic v i o l e n c e on May s e n t e n c e d t o 20 y e a r s i n p r i s o n . that, The p a r t i e s a l s o s t i p u l a t e d a t the time of the t r i a l , prison sentence Release father Center. had not and was The had any t h e f a t h e r was incarcerated parties 15, 2002, and h a d been at stipulated contact with serving that the Decatur Work further that the child since the the s t a b b i n g i n c i d e n t and h a d n o t p a i d any c h i l d s u p p o r t s i n c e t h e d a t e o f h i s s e n t e n c i n g i n May 2002. The m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t , since the stabbing i n c i d e n t , she h a d h a d c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d , who was 12 y e a r s o l d a t t h e time of the trial. She testified 3 that the child was 2120120 progressing normally B's h e r e n t i r e The mother father. testified She t e s t i f i e d that the c h i l d further that does n o t know t h e she a n d t h e s t e p f a t h e r s i n c e 2004, t h a t she i s a p h l e b o t o m i s t , the stepfather that, a n d h a d made m o s t l y A's a n d life. have been t o g e t h e r that as a s t u d e n t owns a m o v i n g b u s i n e s s . i f t h e s t e p f a t h e r were a l l o w e d She college-tuition status testified t o adopt the c h i l d , the c h i l d c o u l d be c o v e r e d b y t h e s t e p f a t h e r ' s i n s u r a n c e receive and and c o u l d due t o t h e s t e p f a t h e r ' s The m o t h e r as a v e t e r a n . assistance testified further that, r e g a r d l e s s o f w h e t h e r t h e s t e p f a t h e r were a l l o w e d t o a d o p t t h e child, he w o u l d c o n t i n u e done f o r t h e p r e v i o u s the child The hearing been mother denied She l a t e r that t h r o u g h t h e s t e p f a t h e r and t h a t they testified parole. that the father years before had had a the t r i a l She t e s t i f i e d that tuition. a b o u t w h e t h e r he was e a r n i n g parole a n d t h a t he h a d she h a d n o t been t h a t she h a d n o t r e c e i v e d any i n f o r m a t i o n release center. as he h a d testified s i n c e t h e n t h a t he was up f o r p a r o l e a g a i n . testified father f o r the c h i l d account f o r the c h i l d ' s c o l l e g e two o r t h r e e notified eight years. has i n s u r a n c e have a s a v i n g s to provide She a l s o from t h e any income a t t h e w o r k - She t e s t i f i e d t h a t she p r e v i o u s l y h a d h a d t o 4 2120120 take the f a t h e r to court t o g e t him t o pay c h i l d s u p p o r t and t h a t he o r h i s m o t h e r h a d p a i d s u p p o r t f o r a b o u t f o u r months before he was child-support sentenced. incident, sentenced. obligation She had testified been She t e s t i f i e d t h a t , that the suspended father's once at the time of the he was stabbing t h e p a r t i e s h a d been g o i n g t h r o u g h a d i v o r c e . The s t e p f a t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t he h a d been w i t h t h e m o t h e r for eight resided years with child. and him that, and during that the mother and time, he the c h i l d supported had had the He t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e c h i l d i s w e l l - r o u n d e d and w a n t s t o go t o c o l l e g e . He t e s t i f i e d t h a t he d i d n o t know o f any contact had the father's contact child family had o r o f any the c h i l d . with the attempts father or the father any of the h a d made t o He t e s t i f i e d t h a t , t o h i s k n o w l e d g e , t h e f a t h e r had not p r o v i d e d anything toward the c h i l d ' s support. The s t e p f a t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t , i f he were a l l o w e d t o a d o p t t h e child, the V e t e r a n s ' A d m i n i s t r a t i o n would pay f o r f o u r years of c o l l e g e f o r the c h i l d . The father testified that the because t h e mother had been " c h e a t i n g " t h a t , at the time of the stabbing custody of the child and was 5 parties on h i m . had divorced He testified i n c i d e n t , he h a d t e m p o r a r y under the influence of and 2120120 addicted cocaine to cocaine. f o r three incident. He testified that he had been o r f o u r months a t t h e t i m e o f t h e He t e s t i f i e d stabbing t h a t he h a d a t t e n d e d a 12-week t r e a t m e n t p r o g r a m , "SAP," i n p r i s o n 2 y e a r s b e f o r e using drug- the t r i a l . He a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t , w h i l e he was o u t on b o n d b e f o r e he was s e n t e n c e d , he h a d gone t o t r e a t m e n t p r o g r a m s a t t h e H u n t s v i l l e Mental Health C e n t e r and a t New Horizon b u t t h a t he h a d n o t c o m p l e t e d t h e p r o g r a m s b e c a u s e he was s e n t e n c e d t o p r i s o n . testified t h a t h i s t r e a t m e n t h a d b e e n f o c u s e d on and d r u g u s e . had father obtained certified depression He t e s t i f i e d t h a t he h a d n o t u s e d i l l e g a l d r u g s since the date of the stabbing The He testified incident. further that, while h i s general equivalency i n prison, diploma, had he become as an a u t o m o t i v e t e c h n i c i a n , and h a d b e e n w o r k i n g f u l l t i m e s i n c e M a r c h 2012. He t e s t i f i e d t h a t he h a d n o t b e e n d i s c i p l i n e d w h i l e he was i n p r i s o n and t h a t he h a d b e e n moved to the work-release that, before of any f e l o n y center the stabbing or other i n January at t r i a l mental-health He i n c i d e n t , he h a d n o t b e e n v i o l e n t crime. t h a t he w o u l d a g a i n be e l i g i b l e testified 2012. He t e s t i f i e d testified convicted further f o r p a r o l e i n A u g u s t 2013. He t h a t he was n o t t a k i n g m e d i c a t i o n f o r any i s s u e s b u t t h a t he h a d a t t e n d e d g r o u p - c o u n s e l i n g 6 2120120 sessions for dealt with The depression, anger father not received sessions, he said, had also issues. testified c h i l d by w r i t i n g a l e t t e r had which a that he had tried to contact t o the mother's mother but that the he reply. Discussion A. On court appeal, lacked Section the father jurisdiction 12-15-114, Ala. first to argues that the terminate his parental Code 1975, provides, in juvenile rights. pertinent part: "(a) A j u v e n i l e court s h a l l exercise exclusive o r i g i n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n of j u v e n i l e court proceedings i n w h i c h a c h i l d i s a l l e g e d t o have c o m m i t t e d a d e l i n q u e n t a c t , t o be d e p e n d e n t , o r t o be i n n e e d o f s u p e r v i s i o n . A dependency a c t i o n s h a l l not i n c l u d e a c u s t o d y d i s p u t e between p a r e n t s . J u v e n i l e cases b e f o r e t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t s h a l l be i n i t i a t e d t h r o u g h the j u v e n i l e c o u r t i n t a k e o f f i c e pursuant to t h i s chapter. " "(c) A j u v e n i l e court shall also exercise exclusive original jurisdiction of proceedings a r i s i n g o u t o f t h e above j u v e n i l e c o u r t p r o c e e d i n g s , including, but not limited to, each of the following: " 7 2120120 "(2) Proceedings for termination of p a r e n t a l r i g h t s , as t h i s t e r m i s d e f i n e d i n subdivision (10) o f S e c t i o n 12-15-301[, A l a . Code 1 9 7 5 ] . " The f a t h e r a r g u e s t h a t , b a s e d on j u v e n i l e c o u r t has jurisdiction the foregoing over a p e t i t i o n to p a r e n t a l r i g h t s o n l y i f t h a t p e t i t i o n i s one a prior dependency p r o c e e d i n g . because the underlying matter, arise or The of any dependency j u v e n i l e court lacked subject-matter his parental We " a r i s i n g out as a that, dependency proceeding, j u r i s d i c t i o n to the terminate original 12-15-114 b e s t o w s upon j u v e n i l e jurisdiction of courts termination-of-parental- r i g h t s p r o c e e d i n g s a r i s i n g out of dependency p r o c e e d i n g s , we do not agree that j u v e n i l e courts adjudicate p e t i t i o n s to terminate a r i s e out of dependency Section of" rights. agree t h a t § exclusive begin a terminate father maintains a c t i o n d i d not out language, p a r e n t a l r i g h t s t h a t do to not proceedings. 26-10A-3, A l a . Code 1975, A d o p t i o n Code, lack jurisdiction but a p a r t of the Alabama provides: "The probate court shall have original jurisdiction over p r o c e e d i n g s brought under the c h a p t e r . I f any p a r t y whose c o n s e n t i s r e q u i r e d f a i l s t o consent or i s unable t o consent, the p r o c e e d i n g w i l l be t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e c o u r t h a v i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n over j u v e n i l e matters f o r the l i m i t e d 8 2120120 purpose of t e r m i n a t i o n of p a r e n t a l rights. The p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s c h a p t e r s h a l l be a p p l i c a b l e t o p r o c e e d i n g s i n the c o u r t h a v i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n over juvenile matters." That section terminate of a specifically empowers juvenile p a r e n t a l r i g h t s i n order to f a c i l i t a t e the child. Section 26-10A-3 does not termination-of-parental-rights proceeding dependency p r o c e e d i n g or with mother § courts 26-10A-3, the a dependency and mandate be order to terminate thereby invoking juvenile the the predicated the on a finding. Consistent stepfather the parental adoption that moved j u v e n i l e c o u r t to accept a t r a n s f e r of the adoption in to r i g h t s of subject-matter the jurisdiction the proceeding father, of 1 the court. B e c a u s e t h e i s s u e i s n o t b e f o r e u s , we make no comment on whether a juvenile court can exercise j u r i s d i c t i o n over a p e t i t i o n to terminate subject-matter parental rights that does n o t a r i s e o u t o f d e p e n d e n c y o r a d o p t i o n proceedings. We We n o t e t h a t , o r d i n a r i l y , a p e t i t i o n e r i n an adoption p r o c e e d i n g moves t h e p r o b a t e c o u r t t o t r a n s f e r t h e p r o c e e d i n g to the j u v e n i l e c o u r t i n order to o b t a i n a t e r m i n a t i o n of p a r e n t a l r i g h t s ; h o w e v e r , we f i n d n o t h i n g i n t h e l a n g u a g e o f § 26-10A-3 t h a t p r e v e n t s a p e t i t i o n e r f r o m m o v i n g t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t to accept a t r a n s f e r . Furthermore, because the f a t h e r d i d n o t o b j e c t t o t h e manner i n w h i c h t h e t r a n s f e r o c c u r r e d , we have no b a s i s f o r h o l d i n g t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t i n e r r o r f o r f o l l o w i n g t h e p r o c e d u r e by w h i c h i t o b t a i n e d j u r i s d i c t i o n . 1 9 2120120 h o l d o n l y t h a t , because the u n d e r l y i n g p e t i t i o n arose out an a d o p t i o n proceeding, jurisdiction, t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t had pursuant p e t i t i o n without to § 26-10A-3, to of subject-matter adjudicate the f i r s t a d j u d i c a t i n g t h e c h i l d t o be d e p e n d e n t . B. Before must a j u v e n i l e c o u r t can t e r m i n a t e receive clear termination, see and convincing parental rights i t evidence of § 12-15-319, A l a . Code 1975, grounds and determine t h a t no o t h e r v i a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e e x i s t s t h a t p r o t e c t s t h e i n t e r e s t s and w e l f a r e o f t h e c h i l d . So. 2d 950 ( A l a . 1990) . f o u n d numerous g r o u n d s In See Ex p a r t e B e a s l e y , case, for termination, does n o t c o n t e s t on a p p e a l . its this The the for juvenile f i n d i n g s the best 564 court father j u v e n i l e court also stated i n judgment: " [ M ] a i n t e n a n c e o f t h e s t a t u s quo i n t h i s c a s e , where t h e f a t h e r has had no c o n t a c t o r v i s i t a t i o n w i t h t h e s u b j e c t c h i l d f o r a l m o s t t e n (10) y e a r s i s v i a b l e , but i s not an a l t e r n a t i v e to terminating his parental rights, i n that i t i s p r a c t i c a l l y and f u n c t i o n a l l y no d i f f e r e n t t h a n t e r m i n a t i o n . " The f a t h e r contends t h a t the m a i n t e n a n c e o f t h e s t a t u s quo terminating his parental j u v e n i l e court erred i n f i n d i n g t o be v i a b l e b u t , rights. 10 nevertheless, 2120120 I n T.D.K. v . L.A.W., 78 So. 3d 1006, 1011 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2011), c i t e d by t h e f a t h e r i n h i s b r i e f court to this court, this stated: " [ I ] f some l e s s d r a s t i c a l t e r n a t i v e t o t e r m i n a t i o n of parental rights can be used that will s i m u l t a n e o u s l y p r o t e c t t h e c h i l d r e n from p a r e n t a l harm a n d p r e s e r v e the b e n e f i c i a l aspects of the f a m i l y r e l a t i o n s h i p , t h e n a j u v e n i l e c o u r t must e x p l o r e w h e t h e r t h a t a l t e r n a t i v e c a n be s u c c e s s f u l l y employed i n s t e a d o f t e r m i n a t i n g p a r e n t a l r i g h t s . " As that excerpt illustrates, maintaining t h e s t a t u s quo i s a v i a b l e o p t i o n t o t e r m i n a t i n g p a r e n t a l r i g h t s when t h e p a r e n t and the c h i l d aspects enjoy a relationship with t h a t s h o u l d be p r e s e r v e d c h i l d ' s best some beneficial s u c h t h a t i t w o u l d be i n t h e i n t e r e s t s t o continue that r e l a t i o n s h i p . I n t h i s c a s e , t h e f a t h e r , due t o h i s d r u g d e p e n d e n c y , h i s violent and brutal actions against t h e mother, and h i s r e s u l t a n t i n c a r c e r a t i o n , h a s n o t h a d any r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e c h i l d since the c h i l d ' s infancy. The f a t h e r c u r r e n t l y r e m a i n s i n a w o r k - r e l e a s e program and i s e l i g i b l e for parole, but the j u v e n i l e c o u r t c o n c l u d e d t h a t he i s u n l i k e l y t o be p a r o l e d a n d i s more l i k e l y t o be s e r v i n g t i m e u n t i l t h e c h i l d r e a c h e s t h e age o f m a j o r i t y , d u r i n g w h i c h t i m e t h e f a t h e r w i l l c o n t i n u e t o have no contact with the c h i l d . As the j u v e n i l e court c o r r e c t l y d e t e r m i n e d , m a i n t a i n i n g t h e s t a t u s quo w i l l n o t harm 11 2120120 the child, but i t certainly will b e n e f i c i a l aspect is nonexistent. will to prevent of her On consequently, to preserve r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the from a c c e s s i n g would not be i n her quo the b e n e f i t s a v a i l a b l e best interest. Thus, and, the t h a t m a i n t a i n i n g the s t a t u s i s not a v i a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e to t e r m i n a t i o n of the parental any f a t h e r , which i s a l l o w e d t o be a d o p t e d by t h e s t e p f a t h e r j u v e n i l e court c o r r e c t l y concluded quo nothing the o t h e r hand, p r e s e r v i n g the s t a t u s the c h i l d h e r i f she do father's rights. Conclusion B a s e d on t h e f o r e g o i n g , t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t ' s j u d g m e n t i s affirmed. AFFIRMED. Thompson, P . J . , and P i t t m a n , concur. 12 Thomas, and Donaldson, J J . ,

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.