Sego, In re
| Decision Date | 24 July 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 1302--I,1302--I |
| Citation | 499 P.2d 881,7 Wn.App. 457 |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Welfare of Johnny Lee SEGO and Rhonda Michelle Sego, Minors. |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
John R. Ward, Sedro Woolley, for appellant-petitioner.
Earl F. Angevine, Skagit County Pros. Atty., Gilbert E. Mullen, Chief Deputy Pros. Atty., Mount Vernon, for respondent.
This is an appeal from a juvenile court order permanently depriving Ronnie L. Sego of the custody of his daughter, about 5, and his son, about 3 1/2 years of age. The controlling issue, among others involved, is whether the findings on which the deprivation order is based are supported by clear and convincing evidence. We hold that they are not and remand the case for additional testimony.
Sego, apparently a young man, returned in 1960 with an honorable discharge after 3 years of army service. While in the service, he acquired a habit of excessive drinking which he continued upon his return. He testified, 'I would get emotionally upset and couldn't control myself.' Following a history of marital discord, he shot and killed his wife, the mother of his two children. At that time the daughter was a little over 2 and the son about 9 months of age. The court found that 'during these drinking periods the father . . . evidenced a vicious, mean disposition, which chlminated in the killing of the mother of said children.' Finding 3. Following the killing, Sego pleaded guilty to second degree murder and also pleaded guilty to armed robbery and escape. In March 1969 the court sentenced him to concurrent prison terms, 25 years on the first two convictions, and 10 years on the third. Sego has been serving his terms in Walla Walla ever since.
On January 9, 1969, at an emergency hearing after Sego's arrest, the Clallam County Juvenile Court, upon the assumption that the children were 'dependent' within the meaning of the Juvenile Court Act, made the children wards of the court and authorized their placement in a foster home. On January 24, 1969, the Juvenile Court, after a hearing in which Sego was represented by counsel, reaffirmed the dependent status of the children and continued their foster home care under the supervision of the (then) State Department of Public Assistance. On April 25, 1969, a further hearing was held. Sego was again represented by counsel. The Clallam County Juvenile Court reaffirmed the dependency and wardship status of the children, awarded the children's temporary custody to their maternal aunt and her husband, Mr. and Mrs. William Lee Johnson of Skagit County, Washington, and transferred jurisdiction over the children to the Skagit County court below, Juvenile Department.
Meanwhile, Sego made an especially good record of rehabilitation at the Walla Walla penitentiary. He took active steps to stop his drinking habit and, in connection therewith, became active in Alcoholics Anonymous. He took advantage of counseling and therapy services, attended Bible classes, and enrolled in an 18-month course at Walla Walla Community College to help qualify himself as a machinist. As a result, he secured a 5-year reduction his sentences. This reduction meant that with good behavior, he was scheduled for release November 11, 1980. In addition, Sego was scheduled for a progress hearing in April 1972 which could result in early release. The evidence showed that his prospects for release by October 1972, when he completes his machinist's course, are good. The evidence also showed that he could probably qualify for minimum security furlough status. Such status would enable Sego to go on furlough outside of prison from time to time to visit his children. The court found:
That while evidence was introduced, tending to indicate that Mr. Sego has a remarkable record in rehabilitation at the Department of Institutions, such apparent rehabilitation is against a background of the structured life at the penitentiary, where he has endured none of the responsibilities attendant his duties as a father and head of the household.
Finding 5.
Following the award of temporary custody of the Sego children, the Johnsons established a fine home for them. According to a December 3, 1970 report prepared by Mr. Paradis of the Department of Social and Health Services, Division of Public Assistance, the Johnsons gave the children excellent care and wanted to adopt them. The report states 'the Sego children have . . . acquired a much needed sense of being loved, secure, and belonging on a permanent basis.' The report then Strongly recommend(ed) that Ronnie Lee Sego be permanently and totally deprived of all rights to care for said minors . . . and that (the children) be placed in adoptive status with responsibility for placement . . . to be with the Department of Social and Health Services.
The report stated that Sego's expected release date from Walla Walla would be November 11, 1985. Prior to the Paradis report, the Department had opposed visits by the children to their father, although no Juvenile Court order forbade them. The children visited the father on only one occasion when taken to Walla Walla by Sego's parents. The Paradis report does not show that Mr. Paradis ever met Sego.
On February 24, 1971, the court's probation officer and Mr. Paradis, the latter acting on behalf of the department, filed the petition below. The petition referred to 'the murder of his wife.' It stated that Sego would not, in the 'foreseeable future (be) capable of providing for the care, control and custody of the said minor children.' It alleged that the children were 'entitled to a home situation that approximates as nearly as possible a natural home.' The petition prayed that the court 'consider permanent deprivation of these minor children from their father . . .' and that consideration be given to alternative relief.
At the hearing below, petitioners were represented by the Skagit County prosecuting attorney. Sego appeared in person and by his attorney. The children appeared by a Skagit County attorney appointed by the court as guardian ad litem for the children, and who filed a report with his recommendations. The Johnsons, although not parties to the proceedings, appeared by their attorney who participated through the guardian ad litem. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court filed a memorandum decision favoring permanent deprivation, and stated:
This Court does not reach this decision easily nor with peace of mind. Mr. Sego has the strongest of all rights known to the law in his claim for his blood children. He presents a very sympathetic and appealing picture as one who has attempted with all his strength to rehabilitate himself, cure his unfortunate habits, and overcome his past rash behavior. He indicates a deep love and concern for his children, and a real desire to reunite with them.
. . . (Nevertheless) (h)aving undertaken their care and protection, the Court must do all it can, consistent with the facts of the case, to permit of (sic) a happy, normal, well-adjusted life for these small, innocent children.
He then entered findings, conclusions and order permanently depriving Sego of the custody of his children and placing them in adoptive status. On December 27, 1971, he entered a further order denying Sego any further visitation rights of his children. This appeal followed.
Sego makes three assignments of error. He first contends the deprivation order deprives him of his children 'in violation of petitioner's constitutional rights.' He cites Const. art. 1, §§ 3, 15. Thus, he contends the transfer of jurisdiction over the children from the Clallam County Juvenile Court to the court below was invalid because unauthorized by statute. Were such a contention to be accepted, the power of a juvenile court to best protect the welfare of a dependent child would be seriously impaired by an unnecessarily narrow interpretation of the court's power. RCW 13.04.140 requires the Juvenile Court Act to be
liberally construed . . . that its purpose may be carried out, to wit: that the care, custody and discipline of a dependent . . . child . . . shall approximate as nearly as may be that which should be given by its parents, and in all cases where it can be properly done, the dependent . . . child . . . shall be placed in an approved family . . .
Furthermore, the court is expressly empowered to change, modify or set aside orders 'as to the judge may seem meet and proper.' RCW 13.04.150.
These statutes are sufficiently broad to authorize the discretionary transfer of jurisdiction to another county in this state in which the custodian resides in order to better supervise the wardship in the best interests of the children. See also McClain v. Superior Court, 112 Wash. 260, 191 P 852 (1920). Sego relies on In re Adoption of Blake, 21 Wash.2d 547, 151 P.2d 825 (1944). That case, however, did not involve a transfer of jurisdiction. It involved an independent exercise of jurisdiction by a juvenile court in one county without the knowledge or consent of the juvenile court having continuing jurisdiction in another county.
Sego then contends that the court below had no jurisdiction to enter the order appealed from because the children were not 'dependent' within the meaning of RCW 13.04.010. It is clear that unless the children are in dependent status, the juvenile court is without jurisdiction to terminate Sego's rights of permanent custody. In re Hudson, 13 Wash.2d 673, 126 P.2d 765 (1942).
Sego claims the children are not dependent because, from the beginning, both the paternal and maternal relatives of the children have been willing to provide support, care and maintenance for the children. We disagree with Sego's contention. The willingness and ability of other relatives to furnish the children's support and maintenance does not destroy the otherwise existing dependency status...
To continue reading
Request your trial