STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS In re S.P.-W. FILED No. 18-0884 (Gilmer County 18-JA-3) April 19, 2019 EDYTHE NASH GAISER, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA MEMORANDUM DECISION Petitioner Mother D.P., by counsel Kevin W. Hughart, appeals the Circuit Court of Gilmer County’s October 2, 2018, order terminating her parental rights to S.P.-W.1 The West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources (“DHHR”), by counsel Lee Niezgoda, filed a response in support of the circuit court’s order. The guardian ad litem (“guardian”), Mary Elizabeth Snead, filed a response on behalf of the child in support of the circuit court’s order. On appeal, petitioner argues that the circuit court erred in finding that she was an abusing parent in its preliminary hearing order, failing to continue the final dispositional hearing, and terminating her parental rights without granting her an improvement period. This Court has considered the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. The facts and legal arguments are adequately presented, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Upon consideration of the standard of review, the briefs, and the record presented, the Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For these reasons, a memorandum decision affirming the circuit court’s order is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. In March of 2018, the DHHR filed a petition alleging that four-year-old S.P.-W. was exposed to drug abuse and drug paraphernalia while in her father’s home. According to the DHHR, petitioner knew that the father suffered from a serious drug addiction, but continued to allow the child to remain in his care. Further, the DHHR alleged that petitioner had a history of involvement with Child Protective Services (“CPS”) and was provided services in 2015. Later in March of 2018, the circuit court held a preliminary hearing and found that the child was in imminent danger of abuse and neglect at the time of her removal from the father’s custody. Additionally, the circuit court found the child was abused and neglected and petitioner was an 1 Consistent with our long-standing practice in cases with sensitive facts, we use initials where necessary to protect the identities of those involved in this case. See In re K.H., 235 W. Va. 254, 773 S.E.2d 20 (2015); Melinda H. v. William R. II, 230 W. Va. 731, 742 S.E.2d 419 (2013); State v. Brandon B., 218 W. Va. 324, 624 S.E.2d 761 (2005); State v. Edward Charles L., 183 W. Va. 641, 398 S.E.2d 123 (1990). 1 abusing parent. The circuit court ordered petitioner to participate in drug screening and granted petitioner supervised visitation with the child if the drug screen results were negative for two consecutive weeks. The circuit court held an adjudicatory hearing in May of 2018, and petitioner admitted to some of the allegations of abuse and neglect contained in the petition without objection from the DHHR. The circuit court adjudicated petitioner as an abusing parent. Petitioner introduced ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals