In re Interest of Atticus B. ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                           IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS
    MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
    (Memorandum Web Opinion)
    IN RE INTEREST OF ATTICUS B.
    NOTICE: THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT PUBLICATION
    AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY NEB. CT. R. APP. P. § 2-102(E).
    IN RE INTEREST OF ATTICUS B., A CHILD UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE.
    STATE OF NEBRASKA, APPELLEE,
    V.
    DEIONTE B., APPELLANT.
    Filed October 1, 2019.    No. A-19-159.
    Appeal from the Separate Juvenile Court of Douglas County: DOUGLAS F. JOHNSON, Judge.
    Affirmed.
    Thomas C. Riley, Douglas County Public Defender, and Timothy F. Shanahan for
    appellant.
    Donald W. Kleine, Douglas County Attorney, Anthony M. Hernandez, and Teryn Blessin,
    Senior Certifed Law Student, for appellee.
    MOORE, Chief Judge, and PIRTLE and WELCH, Judges.
    PIRTLE, Judge.
    INTRODUCTION
    Deionte B. appeals from an order of the Douglas County Separate Juvenile Court
    terminating his parental rights to Atticus B., his minor child. Deionte argues that the court lacked
    clear and convincing evidence that termination of his parental rights was in the best interests of
    the minor child. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
    -1-
    BACKGROUND
    Atticus, born in February 2017, first came to the attention of the Nebraska Department of
    Health and Human Services (DHHS) in July 2017. A report was accepted for assessment by the
    Child Abuse and Neglect Hotline whereby the caller indicated the home of Deionte and Shyanna
    E., the natural mother of Atticus, did not have a stove or a refrigerator. The caller noted that Atticus
    was not bathed often and frequently was dressed only in a diaper. The caller also expressed concern
    that Deionte and Shyanna both used and sold drugs in the home, including methamphetamine. In
    August 2017 the family was referred to Nebraska Families Collaborative (now known as
    PromiseShip) and assigned to Melanie Nicely, a Family Permanency Specialist (FPS). At the time,
    a safety plan was in place due to concerns surrounding Shyanna’s positive test for
    methamphetamines, Deionte’s admitted marijuana use, and reports that Deionte and Shyanna had
    ongoing incidents of domestic violence between the two of them in the home. The safety plan
    provided Atticus with an informal living arrangement with foster parents Trisha Meehan and Liam
    Meehan, supervised visits for both Shyanna and Deionte, and other drug-related evaluations for
    Shyanna.
    On September 7, 2017, Nicely visited Shyanna and Deionte in their home and spoke to the
    two regarding a domestic dispute that had occurred 2 days prior. Shyanna previously alleged that
    Deionte had beaten her with an electrical cord, however, both she and Deionte were silent about
    the incident throughout Nicely’s visit. Nicely acknowledged in a sworn affidavit, that despite her
    referrals for peer-to-peer support and other services, Shyanna and Deionte failed to mitigate
    “safety threats related to substance abuse, mental health and domestic violence” throughout her
    assignment to their case.
    On September 28, 2017, the State filed a supplemental petition against Deionte to
    adjudicate Atticus pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-247(3)(a) (Reissue 2016), alleging that Atticus
    lacked proper parental care by reason of the fault or habits of Deionte, specifically alleging:
    A. Deionte’s use of alcohol and/or drugs places Atticus at risk for harm.
    B. Deionte and Shyanna engage in domestic violence.
    C. Despite services being offered to Deionte to reunify with Atticus, he failed to
    consistently engage in said services.
    D. Deionte failed to consistently visit Atticus while he was in temporary foster care.
    E. The foregoing reasons place Atticus at risk for harm.
    The State also filed an ex parte order for immediate temporary custody requesting that Atticus be
    placed in the temporary custody of DHHS due to health and safety concerns if he remained in the
    home of Shyanna and Deionte at that time. The motion was granted and Atticus was placed in
    temporary custody of DHHS, continuing to live in the home of the Meehans.
    On October 5, 2017, at the first appearance and protective custody hearing as to the
    supplemental petition, Deionte entered a denial of the allegations contained therein, and the
    continued protective custody of Atticus went unopposed. The court found that due to exigent
    circumstances, including substance abuse, alleged domestic violence, and the facts set forth in
    Nicely’s affidavit, “it would be contrary to the health and safety of the minor child to be returned
    -2-
    home at this time.” It was ordered that Atticus should remain in the temporary custody of DHHS
    and the matter was set for a pretrial hearing.
    On May 4, 2018, the State amended the supplemental petition, additionally seeking the
    termination of Deionte’s parental rights under Neb. Rev. Stat § 43-292(1), (2), and (9) (Reissue
    2016). The State further alleged that under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-283.01 (Reissue 2016), reasonable
    efforts to preserve and reunify the family were not required due to aggravated circumstances
    including, but not limited to, abandonment, torture, chronic abuse, or sexual abuse.
    After several hearings and continuances, the matter concerning the adjudication of Atticus
    and termination of parental rights of Deionte was heard on November 20, 2018, and January 17,
    2019.
    At trial, Shyanna testified that she was in a romantic relationship with Deionte from May
    2016 until approximately October 2017 and that the two lived together throughout most of that
    time. She testified that she and Deionte would use marijuana “as often as [they] could,” around
    once or twice a day, and occasionally used cocaine. She testified that Deionte would drink alcohol
    “[t]hree or four times a week” and “would get so drunk he would throw up.” Shyanna testified that
    Deionte was not employed until Atticus was a month old and that his employment only lasted
    around 2 or 3 months. Deionte would supplement his income by donating plasma twice a week.
    She noted that until near the end of their relationship Deionte would spend his money on video
    games and alcohol rather than help provide for Atticus. Deionte spent most of his time playing
    Xbox, often 12-16 hours per day.
    Shyanna testified that she was concerned with Deionte’s ability to parent a child because
    of his lack of income, aggression, and unstable emotions. She went on to discuss several incidents
    where she and Deionte would get into an argument and he would become physical, at one point
    shoving Shyanna onto Atticus’ bassinet with him still inside, and hitting her on the jaw to the point
    where she was unable to open her jaw for a month.
    Shyanna testified that throughout their relationship, Deionte attempted suicide on several
    occasions. Deionte told Shyanna about previous attempts and, on occasion, would leave behind
    notes before leaving the house for hours. Shyanna noted that Deionte never sought any type of
    counseling or other services to address his issues with alcohol, anger management, or domestic
    violence during their relationship. Furthermore, Deionte provided little to no help with the
    parenting of Atticus, leaving Shyanna to care for him. On one occasion, Deionte left for work,
    forgetting Atticus was still at home alone.
    In the time that Shyanna and Deionte lived together, Deionte invited several other people
    to live with them, who often would use alcohol and drugs in the home. Shyanna testified that she
    was concerned about the criminal history of these people and would not have allowed them to
    move in had it been her choice. She testified that the two bedroom house was not big enough for
    her, Deionte, Atticus, and the six others Deionte had invited to live with them.
    In terms of financial support, Shyanna testified that Deionte had two jobs during their
    relationship, where he was only employed 2 to 3 months making minimum wage. Deionte set aside
    $600 for a house deposit, but only about $500 of that was left after Deionte spent a portion of the
    money on alcohol. Other than the deposit, Deionte contributed approximately $100 per month
    -3-
    toward rent costs of $650 per month plus utilities. Deionte would not contribute to the purchase of
    food, diapers, or clothing for Atticus.
    On cross-examination, Shyanna explained that the only financial assistance she and
    Deionte received was from one of Deionte’s friends, Bob Cocanougher. Cocanougher would pay
    most of their rent each month, besides the $100 Deionte contributed, if he had it. She further
    testified that in the total time she and Deionte were living together, the police were called roughly
    eight or nine times as a result of disputes between the two.
    At one point Shyanna reached out to Heartland Family Services for assistance regarding
    their rehousing program, but Child Protective Services got involved and Atticus became a ward of
    the State. At that time, Shyanna ended her relationship with Deionte and moved out of the home
    they shared.
    Shyanna testified that she previously had a protection order for her and Atticus against
    Deionte, but she dropped it because she felt bad that Deionte had nowhere to go and was sleeping
    outside. The order was in place for 1 month. Shyanna testified that despite Deionte shoving her
    into a wall when she was 6 months pregnant, she did not call the police because she was afraid.
    She “had the ideal picture of mom, dad, and child in one home.” Shyanna testified that she never
    pursued charges against Deionte for the incidents of domestic violence because she likely would
    have been charged as well.
    In regard to visitation, Shyanna testified that she set up her own visits, but Deionte would
    often attend because he lived in the same home as Shyanna, where the visits took place. On
    redirect, Shyanna testified that she told Deionte to set up his own visits “several times” but he
    would respond that he did not have the time or would rather just do them with her.
    Tanya Baker, a Family Partner with Owens and Associates, testified that she conducts
    supervised visits with families and receives referrals through PromiseShip. She testified that her
    duties are to observe and objectively document the visits between parents and their children. Baker
    received a referral for Deionte in August 2018, which included information from PromiseShip
    related to their concerns with Deionte and the frequency and duration of his visits. Between the
    time of referral and trial, Deionte received one, 2-hour visitation per week.
    Baker testified that she gives instructions to parents to bring supplies to visits, such as food,
    diapers, and wipes, when necessary. Deionte, despite being reminded, did not bring supplies with
    him to visits until October, approximately 2 months after his visits began. Baker did testify that
    she never observed any issues at Deionte’s visits and he and Atticus appeared bonded. She also
    testified that Deionte never specifically requested an increase in visits.
    Baker testified that Deionte was available for all but one of his visits, to which Deionte
    indicated to her that his alarms did not go off and he did not receive notifications when Baker
    attempted to reach him via phone. On two other occasions, Deionte’s visits were shortened because
    he had scheduled a job interview and doctor’s appointment during the visitation time. Deionte’s
    visits were always scheduled at the same time, from 9:30 to 11:30 a.m.
    On cross-examination, Baker testified that Deionte mentioned to her that he would like
    more visits on multiple occasions, but that his case manager would be the appropriate person to
    handle that request.
    -4-
    Trisha Meehan, Atticus’ foster mother, testified that Atticus first came to live with her and
    her husband, Liam, on August 7, 2017, and became a ward of the State in late September of that
    year. She testified that she was only contacted by Deionte regarding Atticus on two occasions
    between September and December 2017. On one occasion, Deionte reached out to arrange a visit
    with Atticus on the day he was placed with the Meehans. On the other occasion, Deionte requested
    Trisha send him photos of Atticus. Between December 2017 and May 2018, Trisha had four total
    text message conversations with Deionte regarding Atticus.
    In April, Trisha reached out to Deionte regarding Atticus’ feeding schedule and other needs
    in preparation for visits that were to begin soon. Later that month, Trisha again texted Deionte to
    clarify Atticus’ feeding schedule, but she had no future conversations with Deionte via phone or
    in-person after that. Aside from a “Pack ’n Play” and a small package of diapers, Trisha did not
    receive anything from Deionte for the support of Atticus while he was in her care, nor did she
    prepare him for any visits with Deionte. From May 2018 to the point of trial in November, Trisha
    had no direct contact with Deionte regarding anything to do with Atticus.
    Trisha testified that, while in her care, she brought Atticus to 55 to 60 medical appointments
    in the 15-month span prior to trial. Trisha testified at length regarding Atticus’ medical conditions
    including gross motor delays, torticollis, issues with eating, and frequent ear infections. Atticus
    also required a number of physical therapy appointments. Trisha received special training for
    Atticus’ needs, including direction regarding the helmet Atticus was required to wear 22 hours per
    day, and at-home physical therapy exercises. Despite efforts to reach out to Deionte regarding
    upcoming medical appointments, and the fact that Deionte’s phone number was on file with the
    doctor’s office, Deionte showed up to just one of Atticus’ appointments throughout that time.
    While there, Deionte “sat out in the hallway, and was on his phone during the appointment.” Trisha
    went on to testify that since she and her husband have been taking care of Atticus he has caught
    up in terms of gross motor skills and an Early Development Network evaluation in February 2017
    revealed no further needs for Atticus.
    On cross-examination, Trisha testified that Deionte would have been aware of Atticus’
    medical appointments because a followup was scheduled at the first appointment he attended, his
    permission was required for the two ear tube surgeries, and his phone number was set up to receive
    text alerts for upcoming appointments or when prescriptions were ordered from the pharmacy.
    Trisha was unable to personally testify as to whether Deionte received actual notice of the
    appointments via that phone number because it was formerly shared with Shyanna. She also
    testified that at the initial physical therapy appointment, which Deionte attended, he would have
    been able to hear discussions from within the room from where he was situated in the hallway.
    Nicely, the first FPS with PromiseShip assigned to Atticus’ case, testified that her role was
    to provide ongoing case management, refer for services, assess ongoing safety and risk factors,
    assess strengths and needs, and build support and services around those needs for the families she
    was assigned to. She testified that she spoke with the initial assessment team from DHHS, both
    Deionte and Shyanna, and Atticus’ foster parents. She also reviewed the intakes that were reported
    to the Child Abuse and Neglect Hotline.
    Nicely testified that in-person contacts with Deionte were cancelled “at least once a month”
    while she was the FPS. She testified that she had multiple discussions with Deionte regarding
    -5-
    services for domestic violence, in order to address any safety threats and reunify the family, but
    Deionte did not show willingness to participate. Instead, Deionte would say that “he didn’t know
    if it was needed, or he didn’t know if he wanted to participate.” Nicely also testified that she would
    have discussed concerns regarding Deionte’s drug and alcohol use with him. She testified that
    these concerns impose a risk of harm that Atticus might be neglected or physically harmed while
    in the home.
    Nicely testified that during her walk-through of Deionte’s home, which was required to
    approve visits in the home, “[t]here were piles of garbage on the back porch, there were no working
    smoke detectors, [and] there were empty alcohol bottles” that had not been thrown away. Deionte
    also did not provide information about other individuals living in the home, which was required
    before home visits could be approved. While Nicely was the FPS on the case, from August to
    October 2017, she “formed the opinion that the home was not suitable at that point for visits.” She
    testified that Deionte had not done anything proactive, despite numerous referrals, that would have
    made it more likely for Atticus to be removed from foster care and placed back in the home. Nicely
    further testified that Deionte was not consistently participating in urinalysis, nor consistently
    attending visits with Atticus.
    On cross-examination, Nicely testified that while assigned to the case, she only conducted
    one walk-through of the home, in October 2017. She testified that Deionte told her he was working
    at Little Caesars at the time, but did not provide written verification. While Nicely made
    recommendations to Deionte for courses, she did not make a specific referral for any domestic
    violence courses.
    On the second day of proceedings, the State called the remaining four PromiseShip family
    permanency specialists that were assigned to Atticus’ case between August 2017 and the time of
    trial. Each of the specialists testified that communication with Deionte was often difficult. Despite
    numerous attempts to suggest services to alleviate concerns, and facilitate reunification, Deionte
    refused to participate and would respond that he did not require the services. While there was some
    testimony that Deionte had brought supplies for Atticus and the two appeared bonded at times, the
    overwhelming testimony indicated a lack of motivation by Deionte to take proactive steps to
    facilitate reunification with his child. A number of walk-throughs of Deionte’s home revealed it to
    be disorganized, cluttered with empty alcohol bottles and cigarettes, and overall not in a condition
    that would be approved for home visits with Atticus. The specialists testified that no progress had
    been made toward the goal of reunification with Atticus and they would be unable to recommend
    such.
    The State’s final witness, Caitlin Anderson, who was the FPS assigned to the case from
    June to November 2018, testified that it was her professional opinion that Deionte’s parental rights
    should be terminated and Atticus should be placed for adoption. Her opinion was based on
    consideration of factors including the services offered and participation in such, the time the child
    has spent in alternative care, visitation with the child, appropriate housing, stability in employment,
    conversations with her supervisor and other family permanency specialists who worked on the
    case, and meetings with Deionte. Anderson testified that she believed it was in Atticus’ best
    interests that Deionte’s parental rights be terminated “because he does not deserve to linger in
    foster care as Deionte has not completed services” and has not addressed other safety concerns.
    -6-
    Anderson testified that during her time as FPS, Deionte made no progress toward reunification
    with Atticus.
    At the conclusion of the case-in-chief, counsel for Deionte made a motion to dismiss and
    a motion for directed verdict based on the State’s failure to prove a prima facie case. The juvenile
    court denied both motions, based on its inability to review the exhibits in evidence at that time.
    After a brief recess, counsel for Deionte introduced a letter from Cocanougher, which indicated
    that despite the fact Cocanougher would sometimes loan money to Deionte for rent, that money
    was always paid back on time. With that, Deionte rested his case.
    In closing argument, the State argued that Deionte has continuously and repeatedly refused
    to provide care and support to Atticus and allowed him to remain in foster care without addressing
    the concerns that placed him there. The State’s position is that Atticus has lingered in foster care
    long enough and that Deionte’s parental rights should be terminated in order to facilitate adoption.
    Counsel for DHHS added that abandonment of the child was applicable to this case.
    Counsel for Deionte argued that the evidence showed Deionte brought supplies to visits on
    a number of occasions, that he requested more visits, that Deionte’s lack of reception to services
    may have been due to uncertainty of whether he was actually Atticus’ father, and ultimately asked
    that the court allow Deionte to go through a rehabilitation plan instead of terminating his parental
    rights. Counsel renewed his motion to dismiss.
    On January 17, 2019, the court entered an order finding that the State had proven
    § 43-292(1), (2), and (9) by clear and convincing evidence and that termination of Deionte’s
    parental rights was in the best interests of the minor child.
    ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
    On appeal, Deionte assigns that the juvenile court erred in finding sufficient evidence that
    termination of his parental rights was in the best interests of the minor child.
    STANDARD OF REVIEW
    An appellate court reviews juvenile cases de novo on the record and must reach its
    conclusions independent of the juvenile court’s findings. In re Interest of Ryder J., 
    283 Neb. 318
    ,
    
    809 N.W.2d 255
    (2012). When the evidence is in conflict, however, an appellate court may give
    weight to the fact that the lower court observed the witnesses and accepted one version of the facts
    over the other. 
    Id. ANALYSIS Deionte’s
    only assignment of error is that the juvenile court erred in finding that there was
    sufficient evidence to determine that termination of his parental rights was in the best interests of
    the minor child. We disagree. Section 43-292 provides that a court
    may terminate all parental rights between the parents or the mother of a juvenile born out
    of wedlock and such juvenile when the court finds such action to be in the best interests of
    the juvenile and it appears by the evidence that one or more of the following conditions
    exist[.]
    -7-
    (Emphasis supplied.) The statute then goes on to list 11 statutory bases for termination. While
    Deionte technically did not raise the insufficiency of the evidence on the initial statutory bases
    alleged in the State’s amended supplemental petition and termination of parental rights, based on
    our de novo review in juvenile cases, we nevertheless will briefly address the statutory basis for
    termination, followed by the best interests analysis.
    Statutory Grounds for Termination.
    As mentioned, § 43-292 provides the statutory bases for the termination of parental rights.
    Any one of the 11 separate conditions under § 43-292 may serve as the basis for the termination
    of parental rights when coupled with evidence that termination is in the best interests of the child.
    In re Interest of Sir Messiah T. et al., 
    279 Neb. 900
    , 
    782 N.W.2d 320
    (2010). Under § 43-292(2),
    grounds for termination exist if the parent “ha[s] substantially and continuously or repeatedly
    neglected and refused to give the juvenile or a sibling of the juvenile necessary parental care and
    protection. . . .”
    In the present case, the evidence establishes that § 43-292(2) was met and the juvenile court
    did not err in determining such. Shyanna testified that throughout her relationship with Deionte
    she was the primary caregiver to Atticus and that Deionte showed very little interest in caring for
    their son. Regarding his support of Atticus, Shyanna testified that Deionte “didn’t get up in the
    middle of the night. He didn’t feed him, change him, watch him. I mean he provided so little he
    even forgot him at the home one day.” Apparently, one time Deionte left for work and 45 minutes
    later text messaged a friend of Shyanna that he forgot Atticus at the home and asked that the friend
    go get him.
    Further, Deionte provided very little financial assistance or other support for Atticus,
    spending most of the money he had on cigarettes, video games, alcohol, and marijuana. While
    there is testimony that Deionte occasionally brought diapers and wipes for Atticus on his visits at
    the daycare, the overwhelming amount of testimony establishes that Deionte provided very little
    in terms of clothing, toys, food, or other supplies necessary for the care and support of Atticus both
    while living with him, and when Atticus remained in foster care.
    Of the 17 months Shyanna and Deionte were together, Deionte had a part-time job for
    about 2 or 3 months. Deionte was more focused on playing video games, often 12-16 hours a day,
    than on being a father.
    After Atticus was taken into foster care and became a ward of the State, Deionte showed
    little interest in taking affirmative steps to achieve the goal of reunification with Atticus. While
    the evidence suggests that Deionte occasionally asked Trisha for pictures of his son, and attended
    some scheduled visits, he did not take any steps to address the concerns that resulted in Atticus
    being taken into foster care in the first place. In fact, when specific services were suggested and
    offered to Deionte, such as counseling, anger management, domestic violence courses, or chemical
    dependency treatment, Deionte refused and contended that he did not have a problem and did not
    require any of the services offered. It is clear to us that Deionte has continued to neglect his
    responsibilities as a parent, and has not taken any of the necessary steps to prove otherwise.
    We find that the State established § 43-292(2) by clear and convincing evidence, and the
    juvenile court was not in error for finding the same. As such, we need not address whether the
    -8-
    State’s burden was met as to § 43-292(1) and (9), and we find that the State has proven a statutory
    ground for termination. We next turn to whether termination of Deionte’s parental rights was in
    the best interests of the child.
    Fitness of Parent and Best Interests of Child.
    Deionte alleges that the juvenile court erred by finding that there was sufficient evidence
    that termination of his parental rights was in the best interests of the child. In addition to proving
    a statutory ground for termination, the State must show that termination is in the best interests of
    the child. In re Interest of Jahon S., 
    291 Neb. 97
    , 
    864 N.W.2d 228
    (2015). Such a showing must
    be made by clear and convincing evidence. In re Interest of Angelica L. & Daniel L., 
    277 Neb. 984
    , 
    767 N.W.2d 74
    (2009). Clear and convincing evidence means that amount of evidence which
    produces in the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction about the existence of a fact to be proved.
    In re Interest of Zachary D. & Alexander D., 
    289 Neb. 763
    , 
    857 N.W.2d 323
    (2015).
    A parent’s right to raise his or her child is constitutionally protected; so before a court may
    terminate parental rights, the State must also show that the parent is unfit. In re Interest of Aly T.
    and Kazlynn T., 
    26 Neb. Ct. App. 612
    , 
    921 N.W.2d 856
    (2018). There is a rebuttable presumption that
    the best interests of a child are served by having a relationship with his or her parent. 
    Id. The term
    “unfitness” is not expressly used in § 43-292, but the concept is generally encompassed by the
    fault and neglect subsections of that statute, and also through a determination of the child’s best
    interests. In re Interest of Aly T. & Kazlynn 
    T., supra
    . Parental unfitness means a personal
    deficiency or incapacity which has prevented, or probably will prevent, performance of a
    reasonable parental obligation in child rearing and which has caused, or probably will result in,
    detriment to a child’s well-being. In re Interest of Jahon 
    S., supra
    . The best interests analysis and
    the parental fitness analysis are fact-intensive inquires. 
    Id. And while
    both are separate inquires,
    each examines essentially the same underlying facts as the other. 
    Id. We have
    already addressed, in part, Deionte’s deficiencies as a parent in the neglect section
    of this opinion. In addition to the limited amount of time Deionte spent working in order to provide
    for and support Atticus, our biggest concern is his failure to accept responsibility for his actions
    and address the issues he has been confronted with. Each of the family permanency specialists
    assigned to Atticus testified that Deionte repeatedly turned down referrals for services designed to
    address the very concerns that brought Atticus to the State’s attention in the first place. We find
    particularly concerning the incidences of violence that occurred between Deionte and Shyanna,
    and especially the fact that Atticus was often in the same room. On more than one occasion,
    Shyanna testified, Deionte shoved her so hard that she fell on top of Atticus. While Deionte and
    Shyanna have since separated, this does little to resolve our concerns about the temperament of
    Deionte and his refusal to accept responsibility and take affirmative steps to make a change.
    Furthermore, Deionte’s habit of excessive alcohol consumption and ongoing drug use are
    concerning. Shyanna testified that throughout their relationship Deionte would drink two or three,
    sometimes four, times a week depending on if they had the money. Deionte would become so
    intoxicated that he would throw up and black out. The record suggests this was an ongoing issue
    with multiple individuals testifying that they observed empty alcohol bottles scattered throughout
    Deionte’s home when conducting walk-throughs in preparation for home visits with Atticus. In
    -9-
    addition to excessive alcohol consumption, the use of drugs in the home is also troubling. Shyanna
    testified that she and Deionte would use marijuana “[a]s often as [they] could, maybe once a day,
    twice a day, if not more or less.” Occasionally, Deionte also used cocaine. Again, there is no
    indication that Deionte took steps to address these issues, despite being confronted with his drug
    use as an area of concern.
    The best interests of a child require termination of parental rights when a parent is unable
    or unwilling to rehabilitate himself within a reasonable time. In re Interest of Austin G., 24 Neb.
    App. 773, 
    898 N.W.2d 385
    (2017). Here the State contends, and we agree, that Deionte’s refusal
    to engage in the services offered to him shows an unwillingness to rehabilitate himself and make
    progress toward reunification. It is well established that children cannot, and should not, be
    suspended in foster care or be made to await uncertain parental maturity. In re Interest of Octavio
    B. et al., 
    290 Neb. 589
    , 
    861 N.W.2d 415
    (2015). Based on the facts set forth above, we find that
    there was clear and convincing evidence to demonstrate that Deionte was unfit and that terminating
    his parental rights was in the best interests of the child.
    CONCLUSION
    The juvenile court did not err in finding a statutory basis to terminate Deionte’s parental
    rights under § 43-292(2), or in finding that Deionte was an unfit parent and that termination was
    in the best interests of the child.
    AFFIRMED.
    - 10 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A-19-159

Filed Date: 10/1/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021