RECORD IMPOUNDED NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-1804-19T2 NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. D.W. and B.Y., Defendants, and J.P., Defendant-Appellant. __________________________ IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF J.T.W., a minor. __________________________ Submitted November 12, 2020 – Decided December 8, 2020 Before Judges Fuentes, Rose, and Firko. On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, Gloucester County, Docket No. FG-08-0028-19. Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Robyn A. Veasey, Deputy Public Defender, of counsel; Steven Edward Miklosey, Designated Counsel, on the briefs). Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Melissa H. Raksa, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Salima E. Burke, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief). Joseph E. Krakora, Public Defender, Law Guardian, attorney for minor (Meredith Alexis Pollock, Deputy Public Defender, of counsel; Nancy P. Fratz, Assistant Deputy Public Defender, of counsel and on the brief). PER CURIAM Defendant J.P. is the biological father of J.T.W., a five-year-old boy identified here as James.1 On February 20, 2019, the Division of Child Protection and Permanency (Division) filed a guardianship complaint in the Chancery Division, Family Part against defendant seeking the termination of his 1 We use initials to identify the parties and a pseudonym to identify the child to protect and preserve the confidentiality of these proceedings. R. 1:38-3(d)(12); R. 5:12-1. A-1804-19T2 2 parental rights to James.2 Judge Mary K. White presided over a three-day trial on October 15, November 19, and December 10, 2019. Judge White found the Division proved, by clear and convincing evidence, that termination of defendant's parental rights was in James' best interest. N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1(a). On December 16, 2019, Judge White entered a final judgment of guardianship terminating J.P.'s parental rights. She articulated her factual findings and explained her legal analysis in a comprehensive oral decision delivered from the bench that same day. In this appeal, defendant argues the Division did not present sufficient credible evidence to satisfy the four-prong statutory standard codified in N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1(a). We disagree and affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge White. The record shows defendant's criminal activity and subsequent imprisonment precluded him from developing a meaningful parental relationship with his young son. Furthermore, during the brief period of time defendant had unfettered access to James, defendant failed to take any steps to 2 In this same action, the Division sought to terminate the parental rights of James' biological mother D.W. to both James and her oldest child, J.W., and terminate the parental rights of J.W.'s biological father, B.Y. D.W. and B.Y. did not participate in the proceedings before the Family Part and they are not part of this appeal. A-1804-19T2 3 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals