D.M. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Cabinet for Health and Family Services

• Court: Court of Appeals of Kentucky
• Decided: October 17, 2025
• Docket: 2025-CA-0133
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

RENDERED: OCTOBER 17, 2025; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2025-CA-0133-ME

D.M. APPELLANT

APPEAL FROM CHRISTIAN FAMILY COURT v. HONORABLE JASON S. FLEMING, JUDGE ACTION NO. 23-J-00322-001

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, CABINET FOR HEALTH AND FAMILY SERVICES; J.L.; L.M., A MINOR CHILD; AND UNKNOWN FATHER APPELLEES

OPINION AFFIRMING

** ** ** ** **

BEFORE: ACREE, KAREM, AND TAYLOR, JUDGES.

KAREM, JUDGE: D.M. (“Mother”) appeals from the Christian Circuit Court’s

dispositional order finding her child to be abused or neglected and committing his

custody to the Cabinet for Health and Family Services (the “Cabinet”). After careful review of the briefs, record, and law, we affirm the circuit court’s order

and, by separate order, grant Mother’s appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw.

BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On September 26, 2023, the Cabinet filed a Juvenile Dependency,

Neglect, or Abuse petition with an emergency custody order affidavit (“Petition”)

based on a report it had received on August 31, 2023. The Petition alleged that

Mother had physically disciplined L.M. (“Child”) with a metal pole or curtain rod

and a wooden spoon. The Petition further alleged that the Cabinet social worker

had observed severe bruising on the Child’s buttocks. The social worker also

observed bruising on the Child’s stomach, which reportedly resulted from Mother

pushing the Child down the steps on the back porch of the home. On that same

day, the court granted emergency custody of the Child, who was then

approximately ten (10) years of age, to the Child’s maternal grandmother.

The court held a temporary removal hearing on September 29, 2023,

at which Mother was present. The Cabinet social worker testified at the hearing

consistent with the allegations in the Petition. The court subsequently entered an

order finding that the Cabinet had proven by a preponderance of the evidence that

there were reasonable grounds to believe that the Child would be dependent,

neglected, or abused if returned to Mother’s custody. Thus, the court ordered that

-2- temporary custody remain with the maternal grandmother. The court noted that the

Cabinet had opened a case and ordered the Cabinet to provide services to Mother.

The court held an adjudication hearing on September 19, 2024. In its

written order following the adjudication hearing, the court found that Child had

been abused as defined in Kentucky Revised Statute (“KRS”) 600.020(1). The

court held a dispositional hearing on December 19, 2024, and entered dispositional

orders committing Child to the Cabinet’s custody. The court noted that the goal

was to reunify Mother and Child, and that Mother was having unsupervised visits

with Child. Mother, through her appointed counsel, timely appealed.

Thereafter, in accordance with A.C. v. Cabinet for Health and Family

Services, 362 S.W.3d 361, 372 (Ky. App. 2012), Mother’s counsel filed an Anders1

brief, attesting that no meritorious issues exist to present to this Court, as well as a

motion to withdraw as counsel on appeal. The motion requesting to withdraw was

passed to the merits panel. Mother was afforded an opportunity to file a pro se

brief, but she declined to do so.

ANALYSIS

As a preliminary matter, we note that the Appellees failed to file an

appellee brief in this case. Under Kentucky Rule of Appellate Procedure (“RAP”)

31(H)(3): “If the appellee’s brief has not been filed within the time allowed, the

1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967).

-3- court may: (a) accept the appellant’s statement of the facts and issues as correct;

(b) reverse the judgment if appellant’s brief reasonably appears to sustain such

action; or (c) regard the appellee’s failure as a confession of error and reverse the

judgment without considering the merits of the case.” Further, “[t]he decision as to

how to proceed in imposing such penalties is a matter committed to our

discretion.” Roberts v. Bucci, 218 S.W.3d 395, 396 (Ky. App. 2007) (citations

omitted). Because of the importance of the issues presented in this case and the

uncomplicated record, we have decided to review the record and adjudicate the

appeal.

1. Anders Brief

In Kentucky, the method set forth in Anders was applied to

termination of parental rights cases in A.C. v. Cabinet for Health and Family

Services, 362 S.W.3d at 371. Although this is not a case involving termination of

parental rights, we believe counsel appointed on appeal in a dependency, neglect,

or abuse action may submit a brief pursuant to Anders to fulfill her obligation to

both the Court and to her client. As such, it is appropriate to conduct an Anders

type review in this case.2

2 See S.H. v. Commonwealth, Nos. 2016-CA-001229-ME and 2016-CA-001230-ME, 2017 WL 4862403, at *2 (Ky. App. Oct. 27, 2017).

-4- When appointed counsel files an Anders brief, the Court is required to

“independently review the record and ascertain whether the appeal is, in fact, void

of nonfrivolous grounds for reversal.” A.C., 362 S.W.3d at 372 (citation omitted).

2. Discussion

Dependency, neglect, and abuse actions are governed by KRS Chapter

620. A child is deemed to be abused or neglected when his or her parent “[i]nflicts

or allows to be inflicted upon the child physical or emotional injury as defined in

this section by other than accidental means” or “[c]reates or allows to be created a

risk of physical or emotional injury as defined in this section to the child by other

than accidental means[.]” KRS 600.020(1)(a)1. and (1)(a)2. “[A] determination of

dependency, neglect, and abuse shall be made by a preponderance of the

evidence.” KRS 620.100(3).

After a thorough examination of the record on appeal, we conclude

that the circuit court complied with all statutory mandates. Moreover, we are

satisfied from our independent review of the record that the family court’s factual

findings are supported by substantial evidence and that the court correctly applied

the law in concluding that -- as to Mother -- Child is an abused child. Mother

admitted to hitting the Child on the buttocks with a wooden spoon, and the Cabinet

provided pictures of extensive bruising on the Child’s buttocks. We can discern no

abuse of discretion.

-5- CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the Christian Circuit Court’s

order. By separate Order, we grant Mother’s counsel’s motion to withdraw.

ALL CONCUR.

BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: NO BRIEF FOR APPELLEE.

Brandi L. Jones Oak Grove, Kentucky

-6-