In the Matter of the Termination of Parental Rights to: SSO, a minor child, ANOL, aka ANO v. State of Wyoming, Department of Family Services

2015 WY 124, 357 P.3d 754, 2015 Wyo. LEXIS 140

• Court: Wyoming Supreme Court
• Decided: September 16, 2015
• Docket: S-15-0135
• Status: Published

Opinion

OrpER Arprirming tes District Court's OrDER TERMINATING PARENTAL Rickrts

[¶11 This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that Appellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court, Appellant filed this appeal to challenge the district court's March 18, 2015, "Order Terminating Parental Rights of [ANOL]...." In that order, the district court concluded there was clear and convincing evidence to support three statutory grounds for termination of Appellant's parental rights: (1) the child has been neglected by Appellant, reasonablé efforts were unsuccessful in rehabilitating the family, and the child's health and safety would be seriously jeopardized if returned to Appellant; (2) Appellant is incarcerated on a felony and unfit; and (8) the child was in foster care for 15 of the most recent 22 months and Appellant is unfit, Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 14-2-309(a)@iii), (iv), and (v).

[¶2] On July 14, 2015, Appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel filed a "Motion to Withdraw as Counsel," pursuant to EL v. State (In re NRL), 2015 WY 27, ¶ 3, 344 P.3d 759, 760 (Wyo.2015). There, this Court announced it would permit Anders-type briefs in appeals challenging termination of parental rights. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). 'The next day, this Court entered an "Order Granting Motion for Extension of Time to File Pro Se Brief" This Court ordered that, on or before September 8, 2015, Appellant "may file with this Court a pro se brief specifying the issues she would like this Court to consider in this appeal." This Court also provided notice that, after the time for filing a pro se brief expired, this Court would "make its ruling on counsel's motion to withdraw and, if appropriate, make a final decision on this appeal." This Court notes that Appellant has not filed a pro se brief or other pleading in the time allotted.

[T3] Now, following review of the record and the "Anders brief" submitted by appellate counsel, this Court finds that appellate counsel's motion to withdraw should be granted and the district court's "Order Terminating Parental Rights of [ANOL]...." should be affirmed. It is, therefore, ‘

[¶4] ORDERED that Kenneth DeCock, court-appointed counsel for Appellant, is hereby permitted to withdraw as counsel of record for Appellant; and it is further -

[¶5] ORDERED that the district court's March 18, 2015, "Order Terminating Parental Rights of [ANOL]. ..." be, and the same hereby is, affirmed. >

[T6] DATED this 16th day of September, 2015.

BY THE COURT:

/s/E. JAMES BURKE - Chief Justice