Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Feb. 16, 2022
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
119,643 – In the Matter of P.N.H. and A.J.H., Deprived Children, Wando Nicholas, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Count of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Martha Rupp Carter, Trial Judge. This is an appeal of an order terminating the parental rights of Appellant, Wando Nicholas (Father), following a jury trial. Father appeals from the trial court’s determination that reasonable efforts were made to reunite Father and the children. Father also appeals from the jury’s finding that Father failed to correct the following conditions which led to the finding that his two children were deprived: threat of harm and exposure to domestic violence; failure to pay child support for six of the twelve months preceding the motion to terminate; substantial erosion of the relationship between the children and Father; and the children have been in foster care for fifteen of the most recent twenty-two months. Additionally, Father appeals from the jury’s determination that it is in the children’s best interests to terminate Father’s parental rights. We hold clear and convincing evidence supports the trial court’s determination that reasonable efforts were made throughout this prolonged deprived children proceeding for the safe return of the children to Father’s home. We further hold clear and convincing evidence supports the jury’s determination that Father’s parental rights should be terminated for his failure to correct the conditions of threat of harm (domestic abuse) and that termination of Father’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest. Father also challenges numerous evidentiary rulings made by the trial court. We cannot find the trial court abused its discretion when it made the evidentiary rulings. The trial court’s order entered upon a jury verdict terminating Father’s parental rights is AFFIRMED. Opinion by BELL, P.J.; GOREE, J., and SWINTON, J., (sitting by designation) concur. – Feb. 14, 2022
Division II
Division III
Division IV
119,247 – In the Matter of G.W., M.A.D. and K.J.D., Alleged Deprived Children: Anna Hewitt, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware County, Hon. David Crutchfield, Trial Judge. In this termination of parental rights proceeding, Anna Hewitt (Mother) appeals from the trial court’s Order Terminating Parental Rights (Order) to G.W., M.A.D. and K.J.D., her minor children. Mother asserts on appeal that Appellee (State) failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence any of the grounds for termination in the Order and that it has failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in the best interest of the children. Although we conclude the trial court erred in terminating Mother’s parental rights for failure to support, we conclude State presented clear and convincing evidence that allowing Mother to have custody of the children would cause them actual harm or harm in the near future. Consequently, we conclude the trial court did not err in terminating Mother’s parental rights pursuant to 10A O.S. Supp. 2015 § 1-4-904(B)(13). State also presented clear and convincing evidence that M.A.D. and K.J.D., both under the age of four when they were placed in foster care, cannot be safely returned to her home pursuant to § 1-4-904(B)(17). Consequently, the trial court did not err in terminating Mother’s parental rights for time spent in foster care. From our review of the record on appeal, we further conclude State presented clear and convincing evidence that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest; thus, the trial court did not err in making its best interest determination. Accordingly, we affirm. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by BARNES, P.J.; FISCHER, C.J., and HIXON, J., concur. – Feb. 11, 2022