In re L.A.V.
| Docket Number | 14-21-00430-CV |
| Decision Date | 31 March 2022 |
| Parties | IN THE INTEREST OF L.A.V. AND S.H.V. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
On Appeal from the 314th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019-03748J.
Panel consists of Wise, Poissant and Wilson Justice.
Mother and Father separately appeal the final order terminating their parental rights to their infant twin daughters, L.A.V ("Ludmila") and S.H.V ("Serafina").[1] In two issues, Father first asserts that the trial court lost jurisdiction over the suit before entering the termination order (rendering the order void) and second that he was denied his due process right to a fair and impartial trial. In Mother's sole issue, she challenges the legal and factual sufficiency to support the trial court's finding that termination of her parental rights was in the best interest of Ludmila and Serafina.
According to Mother and Father, they needed a break from the constant visitors following the birth of their daughters and Father's father needed a sterile environment for the night while in town for cancer treatment. So, Mother and Father checked into a local hotel with their seven-week old twin daughters.
Mother and Father's hotel stay quickly became a matter of public concern. Prior to the Department's[3] involvement, law enforcement had been called to the hotel twice, had removed Father from the hotel, issued him a criminal trespass warning, and had returned to check on the family. The Department received multiple intakes "alleging that both parents were hiding in a La Quinta Inn hotel in the Humble area." At least one intake reportedly alleged that "[Father] is on a drinking binge and he hid his wife and twin girls at the hotel."
The Department's investigator, Jennifer McGee, went to the hotel and knocked on the room door multiple times without answer. McGee called the Sheriff's Office for assistance. When the Officer knocked on the door, Mother opened the door and began to yell for law enforcement to remove Father from the hotel room. Father became belligerent and was placed in handcuffs away from Mother. McGee reported that both parents had dilated pupils about the size of a dime. At some point the Officer called for backup because Mother and Father were so combative.
The hotel room was in disarray and the room reeked of alcohol. Scattered about the room were multiple large bottles of vodka, some empty, some partially full, used baby bottles and formula bottles with spoiled milk, prescription bottles, amphetamines, and opioids.
McGee reported that she could not see or hear the twins until pulling up the hotel bed's sheet, blanket and bedspreads under which they were found. The bed they were lying in had urine and feces on it, there were no clean diapers or wipes left in the hotel room, and no formula to feed the babies. One of the twins had a diaper rash, but both were otherwise discovered to be healthy.
Mother and Father were too intoxicated to consent to a Parental Child Safety Placement, so McGee provided Mother and Father emergency notice of removal. After a preliminary study, Ludmila and Serafina were placed with their maternal grandparents.
On October 11, 2019, the Department filed suit to Terminate the Parental Rights of Mother and Father based on the risks to the children's welfare associated with alcohol and substance abuse and domestic violence. That same day, the court issued an emergency order removing children, and the Department was appointed Temporary Managing Conservator ("TMC") of Ludmila and Serafina.
On October 12, 2019, Mother and Father admitted themselves into a California rehab facility for alcohol abuse treatment. It was Mother's fourth inpatient rehab admission in three years and Father' third in two years. The court created a family service plan ("FSP") for both Mother and Father. Each of their family service plans required the following:
Although Mother and Father's service plans were the same in virtually all respects, item "8" of Mother's service plan required Mother to "successfully complete a domestic violence assessment and follow all recommendations from the assessment", and item "8" in Father's service plan required Father to "attend, actively participate in, and successfully complete a BIPP ["Battering Intervention & Prevention Program"] assessment and follow all recommendations from the assessment".
At trial the Department put forth evidence that Mother failed to perform under the FSP. Mother completed parenting classes and completed her required psychosocial evaluation. She missed some random drug tests, and several tests indicated that she failed to avoid consumption of alcohol, [4] and thus failed to maintain a drug/alcohol free lifestyle. Video evidence was admitted at trial through the testimony of Mother's landlord depicting Mother walking and stumbling about the property in what could have reasonably been perceived to be an impaired state. Mother testified that she worked for her father for a month in August 2020, but otherwise was unemployed. The Department's caseworker testified that Mother failed to "maintain a safe and stable home free of drug and alcohol use for a period of no less than six months". Mother ultimately conceded in her brief that the evidence demonstrated she failed to adhere to the terms of the FSP.
At trial the Department put forth evidence that Father failed to perform under the FSP. Father completed a portion of the services in his FSP. He secured stable housing although his and Mother's lease was co-signed by Karen, Father's mother. Father also completed his parenting classes, anger management classes, and his individual psychotherapy sessions and provided documentation of completion to the Department. At the time of trial, in March 2021, Father confirmed he made approximately $8, 000 per month and would work as a contract project manager at least through November 2021. But Father was unemployed between February 27, 2020 and January 2021. In this respect there was some evidence Father did not maintain stable employment as required in his FSP. Father admitted that he provided no financial support to Hazel and Cal to support his children.
Caseworker Gomez testified regarding Father's efforts with respect to domestic violence. Father was first referred to a BIPP provider in January 2020, but he missed his scheduled appointments and in March 2020, requested a referral to a provider closer to where he was then living (in the Beaumont area). Gomez was able to identify and schedule Father with the new provider, but she continued to receive notifications that Father missed appointments. Father completed his BIPP assessment in August 2020 but missed the first three BIPP classes and was discharged by the provider. According to Gomez, Father put no effort into completing his BIPP program nor did he "show any change in behavior when it came to domestic violence." Father denied being "violent" or having a "violence problem" but agreed "no child should be in an environment [where there is domestic violence]."
Father failed to show up for all of his random drug tests. For those that he did take, he consistently tested negative for alcohol consumption but tested positive for drugs.[5] Father provided the Department with some proof that he had been prescribed Adderall and Alprazolam, which would explain at least some of the positive amphetamine and benzodiazepine results. The Department was not satisfied that he provided proof sufficient to address all positive test results. Father testified that a physician had prescribed him Alprazolam in January 2020, and testified that he had been prescribed Adderall since he was diagnosed with ADD when he was 12 years old.
Ms. Games, the Department's caseworker, reported that Father did not refrain from criminal activity during the pendency of the case. Although Father had no convictions, he had charges pending at the time of trial for acts of family violence. Several witnesses testified in detail about facts supporting allegations of violence toward Mother.
On January 15, 2020, Ludmila and Serafina were placed with Cal and Hazel, Father's brother and sister-in law, and have remained with them. Mother and Father had supervised visits with Ludmila and Serafina for 30 minutes every morning of every day when visits were conducted virtually (during COVID). In-person visits occurred once a week for one hour and 45 minutes. Hazel supervised the virtual visits, Cal supervised the...
To continue reading
Request your trial