In the Interest of A. R. G. B.
This text of 555 S.E.2d 42 (In the Interest of A. R. G. B.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The Toombs County Department of Family & Children Services instituted this proceeding to terminate the rights of the parents of A. R. G. B. and J. L. P. Appellant is the biological father of A. R. G. B. He was seventeen years old when the child was born in November 1995 and resided with the mother for only about six months. Because of a conviction of statutory rape, he was incarcerated in November 1997. He will remain incarcerated until at least November 2002. He has filed this pro se appeal from an order of the Juvenile Court of Toombs County terminating his parental rights. Because he has shown no ground for reversal of the order, we affirm.
1. Appellant first complains that the termination hearing was held in his absence. The record contradicts this assertion. It shows that appellant was present in court at the beginning of the hearing and that he was represented by appointed counsel and testified at the hearing. His rights were in no way violated.* 1
2. Appellant complains that his parental rights were terminated based in part on the unfounded allegation that he maintained no contact with the child. This complaint is without merit, as the allegation was supported by evidence admitted at the hearing.
3. Appellant’s complaint of ineffective assistance of counsel is without support in the record, as is his complaint that the juvenile court prevented him from filing a petition to legitimate the child. Additionally, the record shows that no psychological tests were *674 administered to appellant because he was not cooperative. Contrary to argument advanced by appellant, the record does show that attempts were made to place the child with certain of his relatives. 2
4. Appellant’s criminal conviction, his near continuous incarceration during the child’s life, and his failure to comply with reunification case plans both before and during his incarceration provided ample grounds for termination of his parental rights. 3
Judgment affirmed.
See In the Interest of F. L. S., 232 Ga. App. 100 (502 SE2d 256) (1998) (holding that an incarcerated individual does not have a due process right to personally appear at a hearing for termination of his parental rights).
See In the Interest of C. N. S., 248 Ga. App. 84, 85 (545 SE2d 633) (2001); In the Interest of R. M., 232 Ga. App. 727, 728 (503 SE2d 635) (1998).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
555 S.E.2d 42, 251 Ga. App. 673, 2001 Fulton County D. Rep. 3028, 2001 Ga. App. LEXIS 1110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-a-r-g-b-gactapp-2001.