Interest of M.R.

2017 ND 281
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 7, 2017
Docket20170363
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 ND 281 (Interest of M.R.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Interest of M.R., 2017 ND 281 (N.D. 2017).

Opinion

Filed 12/7/17 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2017 ND 281

In the Interest of M.R., a child

Jaimee Towers, Assistant State’s

Attorney for Ward County, Petitioner and Appellee

v.

M.R., a child; C.R., mother, Dena Penton,

Guardian Ad Litem, and Christopher Jones,

Executive Director of the ND Department

of Human Services,   Respondents

         and

T.W.R., father, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20170363

In the Interest of P.R., a child

P.R., a child; C.R., mother, Dena Penton,

of Human Services, Respondents

No. 20170364

In the Interest of T.R., a child

T.R., a child; C.R., mother, Dena Penton,

No. 20170365

Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Ward County, North Central Judicial District, the Honorable Connie Sue Portscheller, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Kyle R. Craig, Minot, ND, for respondent and appellant; submitted on brief.

Jaimee F. Towers, Ward County Assistant State’s Attorney, Minot, ND, for petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief.

Interest of M.R., P.R., and T.R.

Nos. 20170363-65

[¶1] The father, T.R., appeals from a juvenile court order terminating his parental rights.  The juvenile court found the children were deprived and in foster care for at least 450 out of the previous 660 nights.  N.D.C.C. § 27-20-44(1)(c)(2); Interest of A.L. , 2011 ND 189, ¶¶ 10-11, 803 N.W.2d 597 (concluding the district court did not clearly err in terminating parental rights when evidence supported the conclusion the child was deprived and in the custody of social services for 450 of the previous 660 nights).  T.R. argues the juvenile court did not adequately explain its findings and did not have an evidentiary basis for finding the children deprived.  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Jon J. Jensen

Jerod E. Tufte

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

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

Related

Interest of A.L.
2011 ND 189 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2011)
State v. R.G.
2011 ND 189 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2011)
Towers v. M.R.
2017 ND 281 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 ND 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/interest-of-mr-nd-2017.