In re K.B.J.N.

• Court: Court of Appeals of North Carolina
• Decided: August 19, 2014
• Docket: 14-352
• Status: Unpublished

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An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority.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.

NO. COA14-352 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 19 August 2014

IN THE MATTER OF:

K.B.J.N. Mecklenburg County J.S.N., Nos. 12 JT 308-09 Minor Children

Appeal by respondent mother from order entered 27 December

2013 by Judge Rickye McKoy-Mitchell in Mecklenburg County

District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 28 July 2014.

Twyla Hollingsworth-Richardson for petitioner-appellee Mecklenburg County Department of Social Services, Division of Youth and Family Services.

J. Thomas Diepenbrock for respondent-appellant mother.

Ellis & Winters LLP, by Lauren A. Golden, for guardian ad litem.

HUNTER, Robert C., Judge.

Respondent mother appeals from the trial court’s order

terminating her parental rights to the juveniles K.B.J.N. and

J.S.N. Respondent contends the trial court erred by failing to

make sufficient findings of fact to demonstrate it had

considered each of the relevant statutory factors in determining -2- it was in the juveniles’ best interests to terminate her

parental rights. We affirm in part and remand for further

findings of fact in part.

Background

On 21 May 2012, the Mecklenburg County Department of Social

Services, Division of Youth and Family Services (“YFS”) filed a

petition alleging the juveniles were neglected and dependent.

YFS averred that respondent and her boyfriend were involved in

incidents of domestic violence and substance abuse and were

unable to provide for the basic needs of the juveniles. The

juveniles were placed in non-secure custody.

Respondent reached a mediated agreement with YFS and agreed

to a case plan that included substance abuse, mental health, and

domestic violence treatment; visitation; parenting skills

training; and that she would maintain sufficient income,

employment, and housing. On 3 August 2012, the trial court

entered an order adjudicating the juveniles neglected and

dependent and ordering respondent to comply with the terms of

the mediated agreement. On 14 March 2013, the trial court

entered an order changing the permanent plan for the juveniles

to adoption. -3- YFS filed petitions to terminate respondent’s parental

rights on 26 March 2014. The petitions alleged grounds to

terminate respondent’s parental rights to each of the juveniles

pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(1) and (3) (2013),

based on neglect and willful failure to pay a reasonable portion

of the cost of care. After an adjudication and disposition

hearing, the trial court entered an order terminating

respondent’s parental rights on 27 December 2013. The trial

court concluded the evidence supported both grounds alleged and

that termination was in the juveniles’ best interests.1

Respondent appeals.

Discussion

In her sole argument on appeal, respondent contends the

trial court erred by failing to make sufficient findings to

demonstrate it considered all of the relevant best interests

factors. We agree with respondent’s argument, in part.

We first note that respondent does not challenge the trial

court’s conclusion that two grounds existed to terminate her

parental rights. Once the trial court has determined a ground

for termination exists, it moves on to the disposition stage,

1 The order also terminated the parental rights of K.B.J.N.’s father, but he is not a party to this appeal. J.S.N.’s father is deceased. -4- where it must determine whether termination is in the best

interests of the juvenile. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1110(a) (2013).

The trial court’s best interests decision is reviewed for an

abuse of discretion. In re Anderson, 151 N.C. App. 94, 98, 564

S.E.2d 599, 602 (2002). In determining the best interests of

the juvenile, the trial court shall consider the following

factors:

(1) The age of the juvenile.

(2) The likelihood of adoption of the juvenile.

(3) Whether the termination of parental rights will aid in the accomplishment of the permanent plan for the juvenile.

(4) The bond between the juvenile and the parent.

(5) The quality of the relationship between the juvenile and the proposed adoptive parent, guardian, custodian, or other permanent placement.

(6) Any relevant consideration.

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1110(a). The trial court must make written

findings addressing any relevant factors, including the parent’s

bond with the juvenile. In re J.L.H., ___ N.C. App. ___, ___,

741 S.E.2d 333, 337-38 (2012). -5- Here, the trial court made a single finding that

demonstrates it considered most of the relevant statutory

23. The juveniles are in the same placement and have been with their maternal aunt [Ms. D] since entering custody. They are thriving and bonded to her. The Court finds that given the age of the juveniles, the high likelihood of them being adopted by their maternal aunt, the strong bond with their relative placement, the quality of care the juveniles have received in their aunt’s care, and the likelihood that both the adoption and providing the children a loving nurturing permanent home with the maternal aunt, [Ms. D] if the TPR is granted, the Court finds it is in the best interests of the children to grant the Termination.

Respondent does not dispute that this finding confirms the trial

court considered the juveniles’ likelihood of adoption and their

strong bond with the potential adoptive placement, their

maternal aunt. Further, contrary to respondent’s argument, the

phrase, “given the age of the juveniles” shows the trial court

gave due consideration to the juveniles’ age. In addition, the

language of the finding also demonstrates that the trial court

considered whether termination of respondent’s parental rights

would aid in the accomplishment of the permanent plan of

adoption. -6- Respondent’s remaining contention is that finding of fact

twenty-three does not address the bond between herself and the

juveniles. We believe, in light of our prior opinion in In re

J.L.H., ___ N.C. App. at ___, 741 S.E.2d at 337-38, that the

trial court was required to make an explicit finding addressing

the bond between respondent and the juveniles, because the

record contains evidence from which the trial court could make

such a finding. In fact, the trial court did make a finding

addressing respondent’s visitation with the juveniles, but

failed to make any finding explicitly addressing N.C. Gen. Stat.

§ 7B-1110(a)(4). Accordingly, we must remand.

Conclusion

After careful review, we affirm the termination order in

part, but remand the matter for the trial court to make explicit

findings addressing respondent’s parental bond with the

juveniles.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REMANDED IN PART.

Judges DILLON and DAVIS concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).