In the Interest of S. P.

The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to continue the deprivation hearing after the mother became emotionally distraught, while testifying, since the hearing was nearly concluded, DFACS had already presented its case and the mother's counsel did not intend to present any additional witnesses.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In two separate appeals, the mother of S. P. and J. T. appeals the juvenile court’s order finding her two children deprived pursuant to OCGA § 15-11-2 8 A. She contends that the juvenile court erred i by reviewing evidence submitted by the guardian ad litem during an ex parte meeting and ii by denying her request to continue the deprivation hearing. Because these appeals raise identical issues based on the same facts, we consolidate them for review. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm in both cases. On appeal from a deprivation order, we review the juvenile court’s finding of deprivation in the light most favorable to the juvenile court’s judgment to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the children were deprived. This Court neither weighs evidence nor determines the credibility of witnesses; rather, we defer to the trial court’s fact-finding and affirm unless the appellate standard is not met. Punctuation omitted. In the Interest of B. M. B. 1

So viewed, the record shows that in March and July 2003, the Cherokee County Department of Family & Children Services DFCS received reports of improper supervision of both twelve-year-old S. P. and five-year-old J. T., domestic violence involving the mother and her boyfriend J. T.’s father,2 and drug abuse in the home. On October 30, 2003, the juvenile court issued a shelter care order to place S. P. in protective custody based on the mother’s alleged drug abuse as well as the fact that the mother had no stable housing. A deprivation petition was filed on J. T.’s behalf, and he was placed with his father. That same day, the juvenile court held a 72-hour hearing; however, the mother waived the hearing, and allowed the court to place S. P. in DFCS’s temporary legal custody. On November 3, 2003, DFCS filed a deprivation petition regarding S. P. based on the mother’s alleged drug abuse and lack of adequate housing.

In the Interest of S. P.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report