PEOPLE EX REL. DB-J., 03CA0893.

Decision Date11 March 2004
Docket NumberNo. 03CA0893.,03CA0893.
Citation89 P.3d 530
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Petitioner-Appellee, In the Interest of D.B-J., a Child, and Concerning W.B., Respondent-Appellant, and W.C. Special, Respondent-Appellee.
CourtColorado Court of Appeals

James D. Robinson, County Attorney, Rebecca Wiggins, Assistant County Attorney, Denver, Colorado, for Petitioner-Appellee.

Deborah Gans, Denver, Colorado, for Respondent-Appellant.

David R. Gloss, Denver, Colorado, for Special Respondent-Appellee.

Opinion by Judge ROY.

W.B. (father) appeals from a judgment terminating the parent-child legal relationship between him and his child, D.B-J. We affirm.

I.

Father contends generally that the evidence was insufficient to support the criteria for termination set forth in § 19-3-604(1)(c), C.R.S.2003. However, he does not identify any supporting facts, make specific arguments, or set forth specific authorities to support the contention. Therefore, the contention is not properly before us on appeal, and we will not address it. See Westrac, Inc. v. Walker Field, 812 P.2d 714 (Colo.App. 1991)

.

II.

Father also contends the trial court erred in rejecting permanent placement as a less drastic alternative and in finding that termination was in the child's best interests. He argues that the paternal grandmother was an appropriate placement alternative and that the department of social services (department) failed in its duty to inquire as to and investigate all possible relative placement alternatives. We find no error.

Implicit in the statutory scheme for termination set forth in § 19-3-604(1)(c) is a requirement that the trial court consider and eliminate less drastic alternatives before entering an order of termination. People in Interest of M.M., 726 P.2d 1108 (Colo.1986). In so doing, the court must give primary consideration to the physical, mental, and emotional conditions and needs of the child. Section 19-3-604(3), C.R.S.2003.

A statutory preference arises in favor of placement with an available and appropriate grandparent if such placement is in the child's best interests. Sections 19-1-115(1), 19-3-605, C.R.S.2003. Placement with a grandparent is not a viable alternative to termination if the grandparent lacks appreciation of the parent's problems or of the child's conditions or needs. See People in Interest of M.H., 855 P.2d 15 (Colo.App. 1992).

The credibility of the witnesses and the sufficiency, probative effect, and weight of the evidence, as well as the inferences and conclusions to be drawn from it, are within the discretion of the trial court. Thus, a trial court's findings and conclusions will not be disturbed on review if the record supports them. People in Interest of C.A.K., 652 P.2d 603 (Colo.1982)

Here, the department evaluated the paternal grandmother as a possible placement for the child as a less drastic alternative to termination. This evaluation consisted of a home study and psychological examination. In addition, a great-uncle and aunt were initially identified as a possible placement but they declined to be considered.

In rejecting placement with the paternal grandmother as a less drastic alternative, the trial court found that grandmother did not interact well with the child; that the child had an ambivalent attachment to grandmother; and that grandmother was not genuinely invested in participating in treatment to address her relationship with the child. The trial court further found that grandmother did not acknowledge the risk of harm to the child posed by father and that grandmother was unlikely to comply with no contact orders.

These findings are supported by evidence that the child did not engage in play with grandmother or seek her out for nurturing and that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
32 cases
  • People ex rel. R.D.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • March 1, 2012
    ...as well as the inferences and conclusions to be drawn from it, are within the discretion of the trial court.” People in Interest of D.B–J., 89 P.3d 530, 532 (Colo.App.2004). Accordingly, the court's findings and conclusions will not be disturbed on review if the record supports them. People......
  • People ex rel. C.W.B., Court of Appeals No. 16CA0860
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • May 18, 2017
    ...discretion. Accordingly, the contention is not properly before us, and we will not attempt to address it. See People in Interest of D.B-J. , 89 P.3d 530, 531 (Colo. App. 2004) (where appellant broadly asserts error, but does not identify supporting facts, make specific arguments, or set for......
  • People ex rel. T.D., 05CA0731.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • March 9, 2006
    ...are the physical, mental, and emotional conditions and needs of the children. Section 19-3-604(3), C.R.S. 2005; People in Interest of D.B-J., 89 P.3d 530 (Colo.App.2004); § 19-3-604(3), C.R.S. The reasonable efforts standard is met if services are provided in accordance with § 19-3-208, C.R......
  • People v. C.N.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • November 15, 2018
    ...grandmother does not identify supporting facts, make specific arguments, or set forth specific authorities. People in Interest of D.B-J. , 89 P.3d 530, 531 (Colo. App. 2004).VIII. Conclusion¶ 45 The judgment is affirmed.JUDGE TAUBMAN and JUDGE TERRY concur.1 Even if the court should have al......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 books & journal articles
  • ARTICLE 3 DEPENDENCY AND NEGLECT
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association C.R.S. on Family and Juvenile Law (CBA) Title 19 Children's Code
    • Invalid date
    ...People in Interest of M.M., 726 P.2d 1108 (Colo. 1986); People ex rel. J.M.B., 60 P.3d 790 (Colo. App. 2002); People ex rel. D.B-J., 89 P.3d 530 (Colo. App. 2004). If a trial court's findings conform to the statutory criteria for termination and are adequately supported by evidence in the r......
  • ARTICLE 3
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association C.R.S. on Family and Juvenile Law (2022 ed.) (CBA) Title 19 Children's Code
    • Invalid date
    ...People in Interest of M.M., 726 P.2d 1108 (Colo. 1986); People ex rel. J.M.B., 60 P.3d 790 (Colo. App. 2002); People ex rel. D.B-J., 89 P.3d 530 (Colo. App. 2004). If a trial court's findings conform to the statutory criteria for termination and are adequately supported by evidence in the r......
  • THE COLORADO APPELLATE RULES
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Appellate Handbook (CBA) Appendices
    • Invalid date
    ...forth specific authorities to support contention of error was insufficient to authorize consideration upon review. People ex rel. D.B-J., 89 P.3d 530 (Colo. App. 2004). Court may decline to notice errors where statement is deficient. Where a proper statement of grounds for reversal is lacki......
  • Rule 1 SCOPE OF RULES.
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Rules of Civil and Appellate Procedure (CBA)
    • Invalid date
    ...forth specific authorities to support contention of error was insufficient to authorize consideration upon review. People ex rel. D.B-J., 89 P.3d 530 (Colo. App. 2004). Court may decline to notice errors where statement is deficient. Where a proper statement of grounds for reversal is lacki......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT