In Re Brown, Unpublished Decision (6-24-2004)

2004 Ohio 3314
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 24, 2004
DocketCase No. 03AP-969.
StatusUnpublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 2004 Ohio 3314 (In Re Brown, Unpublished Decision (6-24-2004)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Brown, Unpublished Decision (6-24-2004), 2004 Ohio 3314 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

OPINION
{¶ 1} Appellant, Samantha Brown, appeals from the September 9, 2003 Decision and Judgment Entry of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, Division of Domestic Relations, Juvenile Branch, granting permanent custody of her minor children, Zaquan Brown and Elijah Brown, to appellee, Franklin County Children Services ("FCCS"), for purposes of adoption. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

{¶ 2} On January 30, 2001, FCCS filed motions for permanent custody of Elijah and Zaquan pursuant to R.C. 2151.423 alleging that permanent commitment was in the best interest of the children and that Elijah and Zaquan had been in the temporary custody of a public children services agency or private child placing agency under one or more separate orders of disposition issued under R.C. 2151.353 for 12 or more months of a consecutive 22-month period. The boys' maternal grandmother, Elizabeth Brown, filed a motion for custody also, and after a number of continuances, the matter came on for trial on December 4 and 5, 2002, January 7 and 8, 2003.

{¶ 3} The trial court took judicial notice of the following at the request of FCCS:

1. Elijah Brown came into custody of FCCS March 25, 2000;

2. Zaquan Brown came into custody of FCCS August 4, 1999;

3. Complaint first filed regarding Zaquan on August 4, 1999;

4. Maternal grandmother filed a motion for legal custody of Zaquan on September 10, 1999;

5. Zaquan was adjudicated a dependent minor on September 24, 1999;

6. The Court denied custody of Zaquan to the maternal grandmother December of 1999;

7. FCCS filed a dependency complaint for Elijah on January 14, 1993;

8. Elijah was found to be a dependent minor on April 16, 1993, and the Court denied the maternal grandmother's motion for custody;

9. FCCS filed a complaint for emergency custody of Elijah March 27, 2000;

10. The Court terminated visitation between maternal grandmother and Elijah August 18, 2000; and

11. The Court terminated legal custody of Elijah Brown to maternal grandmother, awarded custody temporarily to FCCS on September 22, 2000.

(Decision, Judgment Entry and Order of September 9, 2003, at 3.)

{¶ 4} Samantha Brown is the biological mother of Elijah, Zaquan, and another child who does not live with her and is not involved in these proceedings. She was 15 years of age when she gave birth to Elijah. She has a history of using cocaine and marijuana. She is currently incarcerated for forgery at the Ohio Reformatory for Women. At the trial in this matter, Samantha Brown indicated her judicial release was imminent, but she later admitted that she had no information about a release date.

{¶ 5} Elijah was born on February 14, 1992. FCCS filed a complaint alleging Elijah was abused, neglected, and dependent on January 14, 1993, when he was 11 months old. Elizabeth Brown (maternal grandmother) filed for alternative placement of him on March 2, 1999, when her daughter, appellant, was unable to care for him. The court found Elijah to be dependent, and awarded temporary custody to FCCS with a placement to an aunt in 1993. The court approved a case plan providing for reunification on April 23, 1993. Elizabeth Brown refiled her request for custody on October 19, 1993, which was granted. On March 27, 2000, the court issued an emergency care order awarding temporary custody to FCCS and, on August 18, 2000, terminated Elizabeth Brown's supervised visits. The court terminated legal custody to Elizabeth Brown on October 4, 2000. FCCS filed a motion for permanent custody of Elijah on January 30, 2001.

{¶ 6} Zaquan was born on August 1, 1999. Zaquan was removed from appellant's care at birth due to testing positive for cocaine. He has never been returned to her custody. FCCS filed a complaint on August 4, 1999, alleging that Zaquan was an abused, dependent, neglected child. On September 10, 1999, Elizabeth Brown requested to be named as an alternative placement. On September 24, 1999, the juvenile court adjudicated Zaquan as a dependent minor, pursuant to R.C. 2151.04, made him a ward of the court, and committed him to the temporary custody of FCCS. The court approved a case plan and awarded Elizabeth Brown supervised visitation.

{¶ 7} FCCS filed a motion to extend temporary custody and for a case plan amendment on August 17, 2000. After a hearing, the court denied and dismissed Elizabeth Brown's motion for alternative disposition and continued the case for annual review on September 22, 2000. The court granted a motion to extend temporary custody finding there was significant progress in the case plan. On January 30, 2003, FCCS filed a motion for permanent custody of Zaquan. Following the filing of that motion, Elizabeth Brown filed a motion for alternative disposition to place the minor child in the care and custody of his maternal grandmother.

{¶ 8} In resolving the motions, the trial court concluded that it was in the best interests of Elijah and Zaquan to grant permanent custody because of the following:

1. No father for either child has shown any interest, had any contact, paid any child support, and/or developed and/or maintained any relationship with either child. The boys are closely bonded with each other living in foster care together. Any change in their lives that involve [sic] separating them would be potentially devastating given the actions of the adults important to them in their lives. Their mother has, due to repeatedly committing violations of the criminal law of Ohio, been incarcerated and had no relationship with either child for a significant period of time. Their maternal grandmother's status of Elijah's legal custodian was terminated for cause due to the danger that her care caused Elijah. Elijah is in fear of her on a consistent basis despite intensive counseling. The maternal grandmother maintains that her son, Timothy, could not sexually abuse Elijah, despite her knowledge of Elijah's serious mental health issues. Her rights of visitation would [sic] terminated for good cause. Her relationship with Zaquan is negligible. There are no other relatives with whom either child has a relationship at present. No other relatives requested custody of either.

The children are bonded with their foster mother. She, above all others is able to meet Elijah's extraordinary daily needs for emotional support, medical and educational care, and financial support.

2. Zaquan has expressed no preference but Elijah wishes to remain with his foster mother.

3. These two children have been out of their mother and their grandmother's custody for more than twelve months out of a consecutive twenty-two month period. There has been no visitation between the children and either for at least a year.

4. Both Zaquan and Elijah, but particularly the latter child, are in need of a legally secure placement given the history of their mother with alcohol/drug abuse and criminal confinement being unable to care for them in any form and has not complied with major portions of her case plan for employment, housing and being drug free, and Elijah's history resulting in sexual abuse by a relative in the care of his grandmother who fails to believe him and/or protect him from its recurrence, whether due to alcohol problems, or other mental health issues. That type of placement cannot occur without a permanent award of custody to Franklin County Children's Services Agency.

5.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In re B.N.
2026 Ohio 419 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2026)
In re D.J.
2025 Ohio 2573 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2025)
In re C.L.
2025 Ohio 2078 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2025)
In re S.C-N.
2022 Ohio 3064 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2022)
In re S.B.
916 N.E.2d 1110 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2009)
In Matter of A.P., 08ap-186 (2-3-2009)
2009 Ohio 438 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2009)
In Re B.G.W., 08ap-181 (7-24-2008)
2008 Ohio 3693 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2008)
In Matter of K.M.R., 07ap-191 (9-25-2007)
2007 Ohio 5012 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
In Matter of T.L., 07ap-326 (9-18-2007)
2007 Ohio 4802 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2007)
In Re S.R., Unpublished Decision (9-26-2006)
2006 Ohio 4983 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2006)
In the Matter of Sw, Unpublished Decision (6-13-2006)
2006 Ohio 2958 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2006)
In the Matter of Oj, Unpublished Decision (1-26-2006)
2006 Ohio 286 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2006)
In Re M.B., Unpublished Decision (3-8-2005)
2005 Ohio 986 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2004 Ohio 3314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-brown-unpublished-decision-6-24-2004-ohioctapp-2004.