In re M.L.

• Decision Date: 01 March 2018
• Docket Number: No. 105991,105991
• Citation: 106 N.E.3d 926,2018 Ohio 750
• Parties: IN RE: M.L., a Minor Child [Appeal By B.W., Mother]
• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals

106 N.E.3d 926

2018 Ohio 750

IN RE: M.L., a Minor Child

[Appeal By B.W., Mother]

No. 105991

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County.

RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: March 1, 2018

Christina Joliat, P.O. Box 391531, Solon, Ohio 44139, ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

Michael C. O'Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, By: Colleen R. Cassidy Ulrich, County Department of Human Services, Assistant County Prosecutor, 3955 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio 44115, ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES

Cheryl Rice, Assistant County Prosecutor, 8111 Quincy Avenue, Room 440, Cleveland, Ohio 44104, For C.C.D.C.F.S.

Candace L. Brown, P.O. Box 286, Medina, Ohio 44258, Guardian Ad Litem For Minor Child

Michael S. Weiss, 602 Rockefeller Building, 614 West Superior Avenue, Cleveland, Ohio 44113, For Johnny Litt, Father

BEFORE: Blackmon, J., E.T. Gallagher, P.J., and Jones, J.

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, J.:

{¶ 1} Appellant, B.W. (referred to herein as "appellant"), mother of M.L., appeals from the order of the juvenile court that awarded permanent custody of M.L. to the Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services ("CCDCFS"). For the reasons set forth below, we affirm.

{¶ 2} M.L. was born in November 2015, while appellant was incarcerated following her convictions for child endangering and domestic violence. Several days after M.L. was born, CCDCFS filed a dependency complaint, seeking predispositional temporary custody. In relevant part, CCDCFS alleged that two of appellant's other children were also in the custody of CCDCFS, and that M.L.'s alleged father did not establish paternity, has another child who is not in his care, and has not completed case plan services for this child.¹

{¶ 3} The trial court awarded temporary custody of M.L. to CCDCFS. Appellant requested that the children be placed with the paternal grandmother but her home was unsuitable. No other relatives were available for placement, so M.L. was placed in foster care. CCDCFS subsequently implemented a case plan requiring appellant to show that she could meet M.L.'s basic needs, and to attend anger management classes, counseling, and parenting classes. A guardian ad litem ("GAL") was appointed for the child.

{¶ 4} Following a hearing on March 7, 2016, the trial court determined that M.L. is a dependent child. After subsequent pretrials, the court also noted that appellant "has been released from incarceration and has failed to appear for * * * hearing."

{¶ 5} On July 5, 2016, CCDCFS filed a complaint for permanent custody of M.L., alleging that appellant has not completed recommended services, has not benefitted from anger management and domestic violence education, did not have stable housing, and could not provide for the basic needs of M.L. CCDCFS further alleged that paternity had been established, but father had not engaged in any case plan services, and only visited with M.L. twice.

{¶ 6} On December 29, 2016, appellant filed a motion requesting that her maternal cousin, A.M., be appointed legal custodial for M.L. After speaking with A.M. on several occasions and visiting her home twice, the GAL issued a report that included the following:

[A.M.] is nineteen years old. She has a daughter, who is seven months old. When the [GAL] first visited [A.M.] in January 2017, her three bedroom apartment was nearly empty. She had one piece of furniture, a blow-up mattress in her bedroom. Social Worker Olivia Goins–Jordan helped [A.M.] obtain some furniture for her home.

When [GAL] visited the home again in March 2017, [A.M.] had only a couch and a chair in her living room, as well as a toddler bed. [A.M.] was only working sporadically as a home health aide. She said at the time that she was working part-time and was in the process of finding another job. At that time, the [GAL] read through [A.M.'s] lease to her apartment. Her lease was obtained in October 2016 through the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005. She initially had a female roommate that was later taken off the lease. The [GAL] asked [A.M.] whether she was a victim of domestic violence and generally asked her about how she obtained her housing. [A.M.] denied being a victim of domestic violence and did not offer any further details about her past or background.

Because of [A.M.'s] age, the fact that she has her own daughter to care for, and [A.M.'s] limited work history and stability, the [GAL] has concerns about [A.M.'s] ability to additionally provide for M.L. No other relatives have been identified who are willing and able to care for M.L.

M.L. has remained placed in the same foster home since she was born. She is bonded with her foster parents and has become integrated into their family. The foster parents are interested in adopting M.L.

Based upon the [GAL's] investigation, the [GAL] finds that it is in the best interests of M.L. that CCDCFS be granted permanent custody of her. Although [appellant] has made some progress in alleviating the conditions that caused removal of M.L., by participating in case plan services, [Appellant] does not have furniture or appliances at her current home. [appellant] is unable at this time to provide for M.L.'s basic needs, and it is unclear if or when [appellant] would be able to do so.

{¶ 7} At trial, appellant's former social worker, Catherine Borden ("Borden"), testified that appellant's convictions for child endangering and domestic violence stem from an incident of physical abuse upon M.L.'s brother and he has been removed from appellant's care. M.L.'s sister was removed from the home due to neglect of her medical issues. Borden testified that appellant is currently on parole. Appellant had completed some services as required on her case plan, but did not benefit from them. Appellant does not have her own residence, and has lived with various friends and relatives. With regard to the father, Borden testified that he had established paternity, but he informed Borden that he did not intend to engage in case plan services for M.L. and would instead focus on raising his other children. He rarely visits M.L.

{¶ 8} Appellant's current social worker, Olivia Goins–Jordan ("Goins–Jordan"), testified that as of the time of trial, appellant lived with her fiancé, but their apartment did not have a stove or refrigerator. Appellant indicated that her fiancé's relatives lived upstairs and she had permission to use their appliances. Goins–Jordan also believed that appliances could be obtained through a community collaborative organization. Goins–Jordan opined that appellant is more stable than she had been previously and is appropriate during her visits with M.L. Goins–Jordan also noted that appellant has two part-time jobs and was looking for another job.

{¶ 9} Goins–Jordan testified that M.L. is well-bonded to her foster family, and that her needs were met in that placement. The father did not respond to Goins–Jordan's repeated efforts to contact him, and no other family members were approved for placement.

{¶ 10} With regard to A.M.'s suitability for custody, Goins–Jordan testified that she had been to A.M.'s apartment and found it suitable, and a bedroom was set up for M.L. A.M. is employed and has no criminal history, but she is young and has her own infant.

{¶ 11} A.M. testified that she was recently hired at Wal–Mart and also occasionally works as a home health aide. She lives in subsidized housing. She has visited with M.L. a few times. She stated that she was not willing to facilitate M.L.'s visitation with the father.

{¶ 12} Appellant testified regarding her living conditions. She stated that for the past seven months, she has been living with her fiancé. Their apartment does not have appliances, but appliances are available for her use in an upstairs apartment.

Appellant works 16 hours per week at Burger King and was also hired at another restaurant that has not yet opened. Appellant visits M.L. once a week. She stated that she has completed parenting classes, but she admitted that during a visitation, M.L. fell off a couch and bumped her head while appellant was plugging in her cell phone.

{¶ 13} The GAL testified that she has ongoing concerns about appellant's ability to meet M.L.'s basic needs, and that she does not believe that placement with A.M. is appropriate. The GAL stated that M.L. is in need of a permanent home and that it is in her best interest to award CCDCFS permanent custody.

{¶ 14} On June 23, 2017, the trial court concluded that the allegations of the complaint had been proven by clear and convincing evidence and awarded permanent custody of M.L. to CCDCFS. In relevant part, the court noted:

12. [Appellant's other] children, I.W. and A.W. were committed to the permanent custody of [CCDCFS] on January 15, 2016.

* * *

14. [M.L.] was adjudicated dependent on March 9, 2016 and committed to the temporary custody of [CCDCFS] on March 17, 2016.

* * *

16. [Appellant] did not consistently engage in case plan services until at least November, 2016, even though she was released from prison in February, 2016.

17. * * * Borden testified that she saw no difference in [appellant] from before she went to prison to after she was released.

18. * * * M.L. * * * fell off of the couch and hit her head due to [appellant's] lack of supervision during a visit. * * *

19. * * * [Appellant] was not able to demonstrate that she could meet the basic needs of the child.

20. * * * [There are] no appliances in [Appellant's] home.

21. [Appellant] stated that she was working only 16–17 hours a week at minimum wage. [Appellant] did not work consistently during the life of the case.

* * *

23. Father expressed that he was not willing to engage in case plan services to be unified with M.L.

* * *

26. [A.M.] is nineteen years of age and has her own six month old child for whom she is responsible.

27. [A.M.] testified that she works at Wal–Mart[,] and as a home health aide; however she continued to state that she has only been working at Wal–Mart for about a month and

...