In re Bradshaw, COA02-1325.
Decision Date | 21 October 2003 |
Docket Number | No. COA02-1325.,COA02-1325. |
Citation | 587 S.E.2d 83,160 NC App. 677 |
Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Parties | In re Ian Christopher BRADSHAW, a minor child. |
J. Stephen Gray, Salisbury, for petitioner-appellee.
Katharine Chester, Siler City, for respondent-appellant.
Kevin Andre Rankin (respondent) appeals an "order as to grounds for termination of parental rights" and an "order for the termination of parental rights" dated 8 May 2000 terminating respondent's parental rights to his now five-year-old son (the minor child).
On 27 September 1999, Amy Lynne Bradshaw (petitioner), the mother of the minor child, petitioned the district court to terminate respondent's parental rights based on N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(1) (neglect), § 7B-1111(a)(6) ( ), and § 7B-1111(a)(7) (willful abandonment). An adjudication and dispositional hearing was scheduled for 27 and 28 March 2000, at which petitioner, her mother, and respondent testified. Certain words during their testimony are not recorded in the transcript of the hearing because they were inaudible. In addition, respondent's March 27 testimony is missing completely from the transcript, as the tape that was supposed to record the afternoon session of the hearing was apparently not turned on, and only his March 28 testimony is available for review. The trial court entered an "order as to grounds for termination of parental rights" finding in pertinent part:1
Based on these findings, the trial court concluded that grounds for termination of parental rights existed under N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(1) (neglect) and (7) (willful abandonment). Further concluding that it was in the minor child's best interest, the trial court, through its "order for the termination of parental rights," thereafter terminated respondent's parental rights.
The issues are whether: (I) respondent was prejudiced, for purposes of receiving meaningful appellate review, by the inadequate recording of the proceedings and (II) the trial court's findings support its conclusion of neglect and willful abandonment.
Respondent argues that the missing testimony in the transcript prejudiced him in that it foreclosed meaningful appellate review in this case and therefore warrants remand for a new hearing. We disagree.
As this Court has recently held:
In re Clark, ___ N.C.App. ___, ___, 582 S.E.2d 657, 660 (2003) (citations omitted).
As in Clark, respondent in this case has made no attempt to reconstruct the evidence and makes only general allegations of prejudice in his brief to this Court. Moreover, a review of the transcript indicates that much of the missing testimony was clearly referenced and repeated by the witnesses, including respondent, when the hearing continued on 28 March 2000. In light of respondent's failure to give any indication of the specific prejudice to him resulting from the missing testimony, this assignment of error is therefore overruled. See id.
Respondent next contends the trial court's findings do not...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re A.E.
...to find that he was unable to care for his child), disc. rev. denied, 356 N.C. 302, 570 S.E.2d 501 (2002); In re Bradshaw, 160 N.C.App. 677, 682, 587 S.E.2d 83, 86 (2003) (it is beyond an imprisoned individual's control how many visitations with his child he is allowed); In re Williams, 149......
-
In the Matter of L.S.C-W., No. COA09-54 (N.C. App. 6/2/2009)
...where father wrote letters to the children and sent them birthday and Christmas cards, including some money);In re Bradshaw, 160 N.C. App. 677, 682-683, 587 S.E.2d 83, 86-87 (2003) (parental rights of incarcerated father properly terminated where father failed to provide financial support f......
-
In re W.K.
...small salaries from various positions he had while in prison but did not provide support for Wallace. See , e.g., In re Bradshaw , 160 N.C. App. 677, 682, 587 S.E.2d 83 (2003) (affirming termination of parental rights based on neglect when the incarcerated respondent was able to earn a smal......
-
IN THE MATTER OF CR
...health evaluations are among the exhibits included in the record. This assignment of error is overruled. See In re Bradshaw, 160 N.C. App. 677, 681, 587 S.E.2d 83, 86 (2003). Respondent-father further contends that he was unduly prejudiced by the trial court's failure to act within the time......