*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the advance release version of an opinion and the latest version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publica- tions, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. *********************************************** IN RE TRESIN J.* (SC 20267) Robinson, C. J., and Palmer, McDonald, Kahn and Ecker, Js. Syllabus The respondent father appealed to the Appellate Court from the trial court’s judgment terminating his parental rights with respect to his minor child, T. The respondent had been incarcerated when T was two years old, and T had last spoken with the respondent around that time. While the respondent was incarcerated, T was placed in the custody of the petitioner, the Commissioner of Children and Families, after the peti- tioner became aware that T’s mother, who was the custodial parent, was experiencing mental health and substance abuse issues. The petitioner thereafter filed a petition to terminate the respondent’s parental rights on the statutory (§ 17-112 [j] [3] [D]) ground that he had no ongoing parent-child relationship with T. In terminating the respondent’s parental rights with respect to T, the trial court found that T, who was six years old at the time of the termination hearing, did not know who his father was or have any positive parental memories of the respondent. On appeal, the respondent claimed, inter alia, that the trial court, in conclud- ing that he had no ongoing parent-child relationship with T, failed to consider the petitioner’s interference with the development of that rela- tionship and his own positive feelings toward T in light of T’s young age at the time the respondent was incarcerated. The Appellate Court disagreed and affirmed the trial court’s judgment, concluding that there was no evidence that the respondent sought visitation with or attempted to contact T while he was incarcerated, and that there was no evidence that T’s mother, who had custody of T during that period, had interfered with the development of an ongoing parent-child relationship, or that the petitioner’s alleged interference led to the lack of such relationship. On the granting of certification, the respondent ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals