In re M.D.

[Cite as In re M.D., 2022-Ohio-2672.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA IN RE M.D., ET AL. : : Nos. 110957, 110958, Minor Children : and 110959 : [Appeal by T.H., Mother] : JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: August 4, 2022 Criminal Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Juvenile Division Case Nos. AD-17900994, AD-19903792, and AD-20908704 Appearances: Scott J. Friedman, for appellant. Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting Attorney, and Joseph C. Young, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, J.: Appellant, Mother, appeals three orders of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division, granting permanent custody of her three children, M.D., J.K., and I.S.,1 to the Cuyahoga County Division of Child and Family Services (“CCDCFS” or “the agency”). She claims the following error: The juvenile court erred in terminating the appellant’s parental rights, in violation of her rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 16 of the Ohio Constitution. We affirm the juvenile court’s judgment. I. Facts and Procedural History CCDCFS filed three separate complaints; one for each child. The case originated with the filing of a complaint for the oldest child, M.D., in January 2017. Two additional complaints were followed in 2019 and 2020, seeking temporary custody of J.K. and I.S. at the times of their births. The children were each adjudicated dependent and placed in the temporary custody of CCDCFS. I.S. was also adjudicated neglected. CCDCFS developed a case plan for Mother with the goal of reunifying her with her children.2 The case plan was designed to address Mother’s issues with mental health, housing, anger management, and domestic violence. Mother appeared to be making progress on the case plan in late 2018, and CCDCFS implemented overnight visitation with M.D., who was the only child born at that time. The overnight visits were stopped, however, when CCDCFS learned of ongoing 1 The parties are referred to herein by their initials or title in accordance with this court’s established policy regarding non-disclosure of identities in juvenile cases. 2 This appeal is brought by the children’s mother. We, therefore, focus on the evidence relevant to Mother’s rights with the respect to the children. The children’s fathers are not parties to this appeal. abuse and domestic violence in the home. (Aug. 24, 2021, tr. 98-99, 115-116.) The agency later concluded that Mother failed to significantly remedy the issues that caused the children to be placed in temporary custody, and CCDCFS moved to modify temporary custody of the children to permanent custody. The juvenile court held a hearing on the motions to modify temporary custody over the course of two days; August 24, 2021, and September 13, 2021. Two CCDCFS social workers assigned to this case testified that Mother’s mental instability and difficulty regulating her emotions were the primary reasons the agency sought permanent custody of the children. (Aug. 24, 2021, tr. 96, 108, 164, 167.) Mother had been hospitalized …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals