In re M.P.R.

• Decision Date: 16 October 2012
• Docket Number: No. ED 98026.,ED 98026.
• Citation: 381 S.W.3d 392
• Parties: In the Interest of M.P.R., Juvenile.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

381 S.W.3d 392

In the Interest of M.P.R., Juvenile.

No. ED 98026.

Missouri Court of Appeals,
Eastern District,
Division Five.

Oct. 16, 2012.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Patricia Ann Riehl, Judge.
Kathryn B. Parish, Clayton, MO, for Appellant.

Mark J. Schwartz, Theodore R. Allen, Jr., Hillsboro, MO, for Respondent.

Lauren E. Drummond, Festus, MO, for Guardian Ad Litem.

ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, Judge.

Jessica Pope (“Mother”) appeals the trial court's order following a protective custody hearing finding that probable cause existed to believe her daughter, M.R., was without proper care, custody or support and therefore required protective custody. We dismiss Mother's appeal.

[381 S.W.3d 393]

I. BACKGROUND

M.R.¹ was born on January 23, 2012. On January 25, 2012, the Juvenile Officer of Jefferson County, Missouri (“Juvenile Officer”) filed a petition seeking to have M.R. placed into the protective custody of the Children's Division, Department of Social Services. The petition alleged M.R. was without proper care, custody, and support because M.R.'s parents were unfit to care for the child due to the prior involuntary termination of their rights to their previous seven children.² M.R. was placed into temporary protective custody, and a hearing was subsequently held concerning whether probable cause existed to believe the allegations in the Juvenile Officer's petition. The court found pursuant to Section 211.447 RSMo (Cum.Supp.2012),³ the parents were presumed unfit due to the prior involuntary termination of their parental rights to their other six children. The court further found probable cause existed to believe M.R. was without proper care, custody or support, and the conditions requiring protective custody continued to exist. The court ordered M.R. to remain in the temporary legal custody of the Children's Division, and set the matter for further proceedings, including a dispositional trial. However, Mother filed the present appeal of the trial court's initial order before such trial could take place.

II. DISCUSSION

Mother presents numerous points on appeal; however, the Juvenile Officer has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of a final judgment and also argues for dismissal in its respondent's brief. According to the Juvenile Officer, the order resulting from the initial protective custody hearing is not a final judgment, order or decree subject to the statutory right to appeal set forth in Section 211.261 RSMo (2000).⁴ Thus, before considering the merits of Mother's appeal, we must first determine whether the order following the protective custody hearing is final and appealable.

Section 211.261.1 provides a parent the right to appeal from “any final judgment, order or decree made under the provisions of this chapter which...