People v. A.G. (In re L.S.)

• Citation: 2022 IL App (1st) 210824,203 N.E.3d 325,461 Ill.Dec. 171
• Docket Number: 1-21-0824
• Decision Date: 27 January 2022
• Parties: IN RE L.S., Minor-Appellee, (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. A.G. and B.S., a/k/a W.S., Respondents (A.G., Respondent-Appellant; B.S. a/k/a W.S., Respondent-Appellee)).
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

2022 IL App (1st) 210824

203 N.E.3d 325

461 Ill.Dec. 171

IN RE L.S., Minor-Appellee,(The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee,

v. A.G. and B.S., a/k/a W.S., Respondents(A.G., Respondent-Appellant; B.S. a/k/a W.S., Respondent-Appellee)).

No. 1-21-0824

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Fourth Division.

Filed January 27, 2022

Sharone R. Mitchell Jr., Public Defender, of Chicago (Frank M. Adams, Assistant Public Defender, of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas M. O'Connell, of Schaumburg, for appellee B.S.

Kimberly M. Foxx, State's Attorney, of Chicago (Enrique Abraham, Gina DiVito and Brian A. Levitsky, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

Charles P. Golbert, Public Guardian, of Chicago (Kass A. Plain and Christopher J. Williams, of counsel), for appellee.

JUSTICE LAMPKIN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 On March 2, 2016, the minor L.S. was born to his mother, A.G., and his father, B.S. also known as W.S. A.G. and W.S. stopped living together when L.S. was one year old. Protracted custody proceedings in domestic relations court eventually resulted in a shared custody agreement between A.G. and W.S.

¶ 2 On November 12, 2019, A.G. obtained an emergency order of protection against W.S., based on allegations that L.S. was sexually abused by W.S. While the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) investigated the accusations, W.S. was prohibited from having contact with L.S.

¶ 3 The investigation by DCFS determined that A.G.’s allegations were not corroborated and were unfounded. On December 19, 2019, the State filed a petition for adjudication of wardship, alleging that L.S. was a neglected and abused minor due to A.G.’s actions. The trial court entered findings of probable cause and urgent and immediate necessity and determined that reasonable efforts could not prevent or eliminate the need to remove L.S. from the home. The court awarded temporary custody of L.S. to Janet Wukas-Ahern, the guardianship administrator for DCFS.

¶ 4 On December 30, 2019, the trial court conducted a second temporary custody hearing and amended the custody order to grant W.S. custody of L.S., subject to a section 2-25 order of protection ( 705 ILCS 405/2-25 (West 2018) ). A.G. was granted supervised visits with L.S.

¶ 5 On March 11, 2021, the court held an adjudicatory hearing. L.S. was adjudged a neglected minor based on an injurious environment and lack of care ( 705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(a), (b) (West 2020)). A dispositional hearing immediately followed. The trial court adjudged L.S. a ward of the court; found A.G. unable to care for, protect, train, or discipline the minor; and found W.S. fit, able, and willing to care for, protect, train, and discipline the minor.

¶ 6 The trial court then granted W.S.’s motion to close the proceedings and (1) vacated the previous order of protection, (2) found the family to no longer require court monitoring, and (3) found it to be in the best interests of L.S. to close the case. Legal custody was ordered to stand in W.S., and supervised clinical visitation was ordered to continue for A.G., subject to the terms of an agreed mediation order.

¶ 7 On April 7, 2021, A.G. filed a motion to reconsider. On June 11, 2021, the trial court denied the motion. A.G. filed a timely notice of appeal on July 7, 2021. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 301 (eff. Feb. 1, 1994) and Rule 303 (eff. July 1, 2017).¹

¶ 8 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 9 On December 19, 2019, the State filed a petition for adjudication of wardship in this matter. A temporary custody hearing was held the same day. A.G. appeared in court, but W.S. did not. The State's petition alleged L.S. was a neglected or abused minor under sections 2-3(1)(a), 2-3(1)(b), and 2-3(2)(ii) of the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 (Act) ( 705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(a), (b), 2-3(2)(ii) (West 2018)) based on the following facts:

"Mother has made multiple allegations of sexual and physical abuse against father and numerous paternal relatives. The minor has been evaluated numerous times by medical professionals with no corroboration of mother's allegations. Minor has never reported that he has been abused. Mother is the only person who states that minor says he has been abused. Domestic Relations Court has suspended father's visits pending DCFS investigation. Mother has made numerous unusual outbursts in court, doctor's office, and DCFS office. Mother had to be removed from the CAC² by Chicago Police during one outburst. DCFS has requested mother do a psychiatric examination and mother has refused. Mother is not allowing access to minor. Paternity has been established."

¶ 10 The State also filed a motion for temporary custody and a supporting affidavit from the Division of Child Protection (DCP) investigator Karen Goldmeier. Ms. Goldmeier alleged that L.S. was currently at risk based on concerns regarding A.G.’s mental health status. Ms. Goldmeier's affidavit alleged:

"The 4-year-old minor, [L.S.], is currently at risk under the care of his biological mother, [A.G.], due to mental health concerns. The mother has failed to complete a mental health evaluation requested by the Department of Child Protection. The minor's primary care physician, Northbrook police, the father's attorney have expressed fear for the safety of the minor due to the observations of the mother's erratic behavior and statements the mother has made. The mother has refused access to the 4-year-old minor."

¶ 11 Ms. Goldmeier testified in support of DCFS's recommendation that the minor be removed from his home and placed with the guardianship administrator. While investigating A.G.’s allegations that W.S. sexually abused L.S., DCFS became concerned about A.G.’s mental health. A.G. failed to cooperate with DCFS and refused to complete a mental health assessment. In domestic relations court, A.G. was heard announcing her intent to never turn L.S. over to W.S. A.G. also failed to cooperate with DCFS's efforts to take protective custody of L.S.

¶ 12 The trial court found probable cause to believe that L.S. was neglected and that an urgent and immediate necessity existed to remove him from A.G.’s care. The trial court found that A.G. had made multiple uncorroborated allegations of sexual and physical abuse against W.S. These allegations resulted in W.S.’s visitation with L.S. being suspended pending DCFS's investigation of this matter. A.G. refused to submit to a psychiatric examination and refused to grant DCFS access to L.S. As such, the court found that reasonable efforts could not prevent or eliminate the need to remove L.S. from his home. The trial court issued a child protection warrant for L.S. and appointed Janet Wukas-Ahern as temporary guardian ad litem.

¶ 13 A.G. argued with the trial judge, who repeatedly told her that she failed to cooperate with DCFS and needed to do so going forward. Pending further investigation, A.G. was given supervised visitation with L.S. L.S. was placed temporarily in the custody of his paternal grandmother.

¶ 14 On December 30, 2019, A.G. and W.S. both appeared in juvenile court before a different trial judge³ for reconsideration of the temporary custody order. The Cook County Public Guardian's office (Public Guardian) and the State now recommended that custody of L.S. be given to W.S. A lengthy evidentiary hearing followed, at which Ms. Goldmeier provided additional testimony detailing facts established during the ongoing investigation by DCFS.

¶ 15 Evidence adduced at the hearing established that on November 12, 2019, A.G. applied for and was granted an emergency order of protection against W.S. That same day, L.S.’s case came to the attention of DCFS upon their receipt of a hotline call of sexual abuse. Ms. Goldmeier, who held a master's degree in social work from the University of Illinois, was assigned to L.S.’s case.

¶ 16 By the time the hotline call was placed, the Northbrook Police Department was already investigating this matter, and L.S. had seen two doctors regarding the sex abuse allegations. Ms. Goldmeier spoke with Detective Theresa Drews, who was one of the investigating officers. Detective Drews had "concerns" about A.G. because she provided inconsistent reports of what L.S. told her had happened to him.

¶ 17 Ms. Goldmeier testified that medical records from St. Mary's Hospital were compared with A.G.’s claim that during L.S.’s examination that he "popped his butt upward which was too sexual for her liking." However, the hospital records established that L.S. was smiling, playful, and made no allegations of abuse. A rape kit taken at St. Mary's Hospital revealed no physical evidence of abuse to L.S.

¶ 18 Detective Drews also informed Ms. Goldmeier that A.G. failed to disclose that she made a police report with the Arlington Heights Police Department before making the same complaint with the Northbrook Police Department.

¶ 19 After L.S. was examined at St. Mary's Hospital, A.G. took him to Northwest Community Hospital for a second medical examination. That examination also failed to reveal any physical evidence of abuse.

¶ 20 On November 13, 2019, Ms. Goldmeier spoke with A.G. and learned more family history, including the fact that W.S. had previously obtained an order of protection against A.G. In 2017, after A.G. participated in family therapy, she was allowed unsupervised visitation with L.S. from Saturday to Monday. L.S. resided with W.S. for the remainder of the week. In February of 2019, a judge in domestic relations court granted A.G. and W.S. shared custody of L.S.

¶ 21 W.S. moved from Chicago to Arlington Heights in August of 2019. A.G. alleged that after the move, L.S. told her that W.S.’s cousin and uncle were hitting L.S. in the basement of their Northbrook home. A.G. brought these claims to W.S.’s attention, but he denied them.

¶ 22 On November 19, 2019, L.S. participated in a victim-sensitive interview (VSI) at the CAC.⁴ Detective Drews and Ms. Goldmeier observed the interview. According to Ms....