Dept. of Human Services v. R. W. K. (A177619) ( 2022 )

675
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion
pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited
except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
Argued and submitted June 7, affirmed July 7, petitions for review denied
October 20, 2022 (370 Or 404)
In the Matter of K. W. K.,
aka K. K., a Child.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERIVCES,
Petitioner-Respondent,
v.
R. W. K.
and K. K. D.,
Appellants.
Deschutes County Circuit Court
18JU09635, 19JU06834;
A177619 (Control), A177620
In the Matter of K. L. K.,
aka K. L. K., a Child.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERIVCES,
Petitioner-Respondent,
v.
R. W. K.
and K. K. D.,
Appellants.
Deschutes County Circuit Court
18JU09639, 19JU06835;
A177621, A177622
Alison M. Emerson, Judge.
Ginger Fitch argued the cause for appellant K. K. D. Also
on the briefs was Youth, Rights & Justice.
Shannon Storey, Chief Defender, Juvenile Appellate
Section, and Sarah Peterson, Deputy Public Defender, Office
of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant
R. W. K.
676 Dept. of Human Services v. R. W. K. (A177619)
Stacy M. Chaffin, Assistant Attorney General, argued
the cause for respondent. Also on the brief were Ellen F.
Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General.
Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and
Kamins, Judge.
KAMINS, J.
Affirmed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op: 320 Or App 675 (2022) 677
KAMINS, J.
In this consolidated juvenile dependency case, par-
ents appeal the juvenile court’s permanency judgments,
challenging the denial of their request to change their two
children’s permanency plans from adoption to guardianship.
Mother assigns one error and father assigns eight, but each
assignment presents the same legal argument, that there
was a “compelling reason” to determine that proceeding with
a petition to terminate parental rights would not be in the
children’s “best interests.” ORS 419B.498(2)(b). More specif-
ically, parents argue that guardianship was “better suited”
than adoption to meet the children’s need to preserve their
bond with mother. ORS 419B.498(2)(b)(B). Having reviewed
the record, we conclude that the juvenile court did not err in
determining that adoption, in lieu of guardianship, was in
these children’s best interests. See Dept. of Human Services
v. S. J. M., 364 Or 37, 53, 430 P3d 1021 (2018) (“[T]he party
that wishes to show that the exceptions in ORS 419B.498(2)
do apply bears the burden of proof.” (Emphasis in original.)).
Affirmed.