Interest of P.R.-K.
This text of 2023 ND 184 (Interest of P.R.-K.) 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.
Opinion
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT SEPTEMBER 28, 2023 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2023 ND 184
In the Interest of P.R.-K., minor child State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. P.R.-K., child; P.R.-K., father; Respondents and C.B., mother, Respondent and Appellant
No. 20230281
In the Interest of K.R.-K., minor child State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. K.R.-K., child; P.R.-K., father; Respondents and C.B., mother, Respondent and Appellant
No. 20230282
Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Ward County, North Central Judicial District, the Honorable Kelly A. Dillon, Judicial Referee.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Rozanna C. Larson, State’s Attorney, Minot, ND, for petitioner and appellee.
Kiara C. Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, ND, for respondent and appellant. Interest of P.R.-K. and K.R.-K. Nos. 20230281 & 20230282
[¶1] C.B. appeals from the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights to her two minor children, P.R.-K. and K.R.-K. C.B. argues the court erred in finding conditions and causes of deprivation are likely to continue. C.B. also argues the court erred in finding the children will suffer physical, mental, moral or emotional harm without termination. The record supports the court’s findings by clear and convincing evidence that a child tested positive for THC and methamphetamine, and C.B. continued using methamphetamine, was homeless, lacked employment, and had suicidal tendencies. Those findings are not clearly erroneous.
[¶2] The juvenile court found the children spent over 450 of the last 660 nights in the care, control, and custody of the human service zone and are in need of protection. The record supports the court’s findings, and they are not clearly erroneous. Based on the findings, the court did not abuse its discretion terminating C.B.’s parental rights. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).
[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Douglas A. Bahr
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2023 ND 184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/interest-of-pr-k-nd-2023.