In re: A.H.

• Court: Court of Appeals of North Carolina
• Decided: March 4, 2026
• Docket: 25-471
• Status: Unpublished
• Author: Judge Chris Dillon

Opinion

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA

No. COA 25-471

Filed 4 March 2026

Durham County, No. 20JA000163-310

IN THE MATTER OF:

A.H. Minor Child

Appeal by respondent-appellant from judgment entered 20 December 2024 by

Judge Kendra Montgomery-Blinn in Durham County District Court. Heard in the

Court of Appeals 28 January 2026.

Mercedes O. Chut for respondent-appellant father.

Michelle FormyDuval Lynch for guardian ad litem.

No brief filed by petitioner-appellee Durham County Department of Social Services.

DILLON, Chief Judge.

Respondent-Father (“Father”) appeals from an order terminating his parental

rights. Counsel for Father filed a no-merit brief under Rule 3.1(e) of the North

Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Counsel filing a Rule 3.1(e) no-merit brief is required to “identify any issues in

the record on appeal that arguably support the appeal and must state why those IN RE: A.H.

Opinion of the Court

issues lack merit or would not alter the ultimate result.” N.C. R. App. P. 3.1(e) (2023).

Here, counsel fully complied with all the requirements of Rule 3.1(e).

Father’s counsel identified three issues for our independent review: whether

the trial court erred in concluding a ground existed to terminate Father’s parental

rights under N.C.G.S. § 7B-111(a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3).

This Court conducts an independent review of the issues raised in the no-merit

brief. In re L.E.M., 372 N.C. 396, 402, 831 S.E. 2d 341, 345 (2019). “[T]he text of Rule

3.1([e]) plainly contemplates appellate review of the issues contained in a no-merit

brief.” Id. “[W]e are satisfied that the trial court's order terminating [Father’s]

parental rights is supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and is based

on proper legal grounds.” In re K.M.S., 380 N.C. 56, 59, 867 S.E. 2d 868, 870 (2022).

Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order.

AFFIRMED.

Judges TYSON and CARPENTER concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).

-2-