People v. LaShea L. (In re M.L.)
| Decision Date | 21 May 2021 |
| Docket Number | NO. 4-21-0005,NO. 4-21-0006,NO. 4-21-0007 cons.,4-21-0005,4-21-0006,4-21-0007 cons. |
| Citation | 2021 IL App (4th) 210005 -U |
| Parties | In re M.L., S.L., and T.L., Minors (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. LaShea L., Respondent-Appellant). |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
2021 IL App (4th) 210005-U
In re M.L., S.L., and T.L., Minors
(The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
LaShea L., Respondent-Appellant).
NO. 4-21-0005
NO. 4-21-0006
NO. 4-21-0007 cons.
APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FOURTH DISTRICT
May 21, 2021
NOTICE
This Order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Macon County
Nos. 18JA39 18JA40 18JA41
Honorable Thomas E. Little, Judge Presiding.
JUSTICE DeARMOND delivered the judgment of the court.
Justices Cavanagh and Steigmann concurred in the judgment.
ORDER
¶ 1 Held: The appellate court affirmed, holding the trial court did not err in terminating respondent's parental rights.
¶ 2 In February 2018, the State filed a petition for adjudication of neglect or abuse with respect to M.L., S.L., and T.L., the minor children of respondent, LaShea L. In April 2018, the trial court adjudicated the minors abused and neglected, made them wards of the court, and placed custody and guardianship with the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). The State filed a motion to terminate respondent's parental rights in February 2020. Following hearings on the State's motion in October and November 2020, the court found respondent an "unfit person" within the meaning of section 1(D) of the Adoption Act (750 ILCS 50/1(D) (West 2018)). The court then held a best-interests hearing in December 2020, where the court found it
Page 2
was in the minors' best interests to terminate respondent's parental rights.
¶ 3 In January 2021, respondent moved to consolidate the three cases into this one appeal, and we granted the motion. On appeal, respondent argues the trial court erred in terminating her parental rights; specifically, she alleges the trial court's unfitness findings and best-interests determination stand against the manifest weight of the evidence. We affirm.
¶ 5 On February 6, 2018, the State filed a petition for adjudication of neglect with respect to M.L. (born December 22, 2013), S.L. (born June 1, 2012), and T.L. (born March 3, 2015), minor children of respondent mother (LaShea L.), alleging the children were neglected and abused under various sections of the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 (Juvenile Court Act) (705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(a), (b), (2)(ii) (West 2018)). After a shelter care hearing, the trial court issued an order, to which respondent mother stipulated, finding probable cause for abuse and neglect based upon a lack of supervision and failed intact services. The trial court placed temporary custody and guardianship of the children with DCFS.
¶ 6 DCFS previously opened an intact family services case for LaShea L. and her three children. The family's home lacked electricity, they were staying with family, the children slept together in one bed, and they lacked adequate food. DCFS provided intact services to assist LaShea L. with housing and stabilizing the family. LaShea L. frequently left the children—ages two, four, and five—with inappropriate caregivers, she missed visits with the children, and she engaged minimally in the services DCFS offered, resulting in the State eventually filing a petition to revoke supervision and proceed with petitions seeking to have the children adjudicated neglected.
¶ 7 As a result of the probable cause finding and temporary placement of the children,
Page 3
DCFS established a caregiver service plan for LaShea L., setting the following goals: participate in a parenting assessment and parenting education services; establish stable housing; remain free from all criminal involvement; complete drug screens as requested; consistently attend and appropriately participate in visitation with the children; and actively and honestly participate in a mental health assessment to determine treatment needs and follow any treatment recommendations.
¶ 9 On April 19, 2018, the trial court issued an adjudicatory order finding: The minors were abused and neglected as defined by section 2-3 of the Juvenile Court Act (705 ILCS 405/2-3 (West 2018)), in that the minors suffered from a lack of support, education, and remedial care as defined by section 2-3(1)(a) (705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(a) (West 2018)); the minors were in an environment that was injurious to their welfare as defined by section 2-3(1)(b) (705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(b) (West 2018)); and the minors were at substantial risk of physical abuse as defined by section 2-3(2)(ii) (705 ILCS 405/2-3(2)(ii) (West 2018)). The court based its findings on the following facts: "[the] children [were] left with people for days with no plan or provision, environmental issues, [and] failure to provide [for the children's] basic needs." The court then found respondent mother inflicted the abuse or neglect. The court determined the State proved its allegations of abuse or neglect by a preponderance of the evidence, but it also noted respondent mother was in default because she did not appear for the hearing, even though she received personal service and proper notice. Respondent mother had failed to appear since the initial admonishment on the petitions in March 2018.
¶ 10 The trial court also issued a dispositional order on April 19, 2018, finding LaShea L. unfit, unable, and unwilling to care for, protect, train, educate, supervise, or discipline
Page 4
the children and determining placement with her is contrary to the children's health, safety, and best interests because of "mother's lack of providing for [the children's] basic needs, incomplete, inadequate care plans when leaving [the children] with others; and mother failed to appear and [had] defaulted." The court granted the State's petition, adjudicated the children abused and neglected, and made them wards of the court. The court ordered DCFS to maintain custody and guardianship over the children.
¶ 12 On February 7, 2020, the State filed a motion seeking a finding of unfitness and termination of the parental rights of LaShea L. to M.L., S.L., and T.L. The State alleged LaShea L. was an unfit person pursuant to section 1(D) of the Adoption Act (750 ILCS 50/1(D) (West 2018)). The State's petition identified five counts as to respondent mother: (1) LaShea L. had failed to maintain a reasonable degree of interest, concern, or responsibility as to the minors' welfare (750 ILCS 50/1(D)(b) (West 2018)); (2) LaShea L. had failed to make reasonable efforts to correct the conditions that were the basis for the removal of the minors from the parent during any nine-month period following the adjudication of neglect (750 ILCS 50/1(D)(m)(i) (West 2018)); (3) LaShea L. had failed to make reasonable progress toward the return of the minors to the parent during any nine-month period following the adjudication of neglect, specifically the nine-month period between April 19, 2018, and January 19, 2019 (750 ILCS 50/1(D)(m)(ii) (West 2018)); (4) LaShea L. had failed to make reasonable progress toward the return of the minor to the parent during any nine-month period following the adjudication of neglect, specifically the nine-month period between January 19, 2019, and October 19, 2019 (750 ILCS 50/1(D)(m)(ii) (West 2018)); and (5) LaShea L. had failed to make reasonable progress toward the return of the minor to the parent during any nine-month period following the adjudication of
Page 5
neglect, specifically the nine-month period between April 27, 2019, and January 27, 2020 (750 ILCS 50/1(D)(m)(ii) (West 2018)).
¶ 13 The State further contended termination of LaShea L.'s parental rights was in the children's best interests and asked for custody and guardianship to remain with DCFS, giving it the authority to consent to the children's adoption.
¶ 14 In October 2020, the trial court held a fitness hearing. LaShea L. attended the hearing represented by counsel. The State called four witnesses. Lindsay Lyon, director of DCFS Supportive Services for Webster-Cantrell Youth Advocacy (Webster-Cantrell), testified she supervised LaShea L.'s case beginning in October 2018. Lyon testified DCFS referred LaShea L. to Webster-Cantrell for services but LaShea L. did not respond to Webster-Cantrell's initial attempts to contact her. For example, DCFS referred LaShea L. to Webster-Cantrell for counseling services in October and December 2018, but she did not respond either time. When DCFS made another counseling referral in September 2019, LaShea L. responded and scheduled counseling sessions for October and November. She failed to attend any of the five counseling appointments. Webster-Cantrell rescheduled those appointments for December and January, but she did not attend those sessions either. Lyon also testified LaShea L. received a housing voucher in 2018 and elected to use it for renting a house. LaShea L. lost the voucher, however, when she failed to engage in services. Lyon finally testified Webster-Cantrell staff encouraged LaShea L. to participate in services when she attended family meetings.
¶ 15 Christine Foster, a parenting educator for Webster-Cantrell, testified she worked with LaShea L. during the intact case and again when DCFS referred LaShea L. for intensive one-on-one parenting classes in March 2018. Foster administered the initial parenting assessment, and LaShea L. scored in the high risk category for four of the five constructs,
Page 6
namely: appropriate expectations, empathy, reversing family roles or rules, and parent attendance. LaShea L. scored in the medium risk category for the fifth construct, belief in corporal punishment. Foster testified LaShea L. failed to attend "a lot" of parenting-education appointments. Foster reached out to LaShea L. again in September 2018 and kept reaching out until LaShea L. finally responded in February 2019. Foster testified she readministered the parenting assessment in February. LaShea L. attended three sessions before she began...
To continue reading
Request your trial