Opinion
No. COA13–4.
2013-07-2
In the Matter of A.N.M., Juvenile.
No brief filed on behalf of petitioner-appellee Jackson County Department of Social Services. Diepenbrock Law Office, P.A., by J. Thomas Diepenbrock for respondent-appellant.
Appeal by respondent from order entered 19 October 2012 by Judge Monica H. Leslie in Jackson County District Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 4 June 2013. No brief filed on behalf of petitioner-appellee Jackson County Department of Social Services. Diepenbrock Law Office, P.A., by J. Thomas Diepenbrock for respondent-appellant.
No brief filed on behalf of guardian ad litem.
DAVIS, Judge.
Respondent-father (“respondent”) appeals from the trial court's order terminating his parental rights to his daughter, A.N.M. (“Angela”). After careful review, we affirm the order of the trial court.
The pseudonym “Angela” is used throughout this opinion to
Factual Background
Jackson County Department of Social Services (“DSS”) filed a juvenile petition on 13 May 2011 alleging that Angela was an abused, neglected, and dependent juvenile. DSS took nonsecure custody of Angela on the same date. By order entered on 3 August 2011, the trial court adjudicated Angela to be neglected and dependent. In a separate disposition order, the trial court gave custody of Angela to DSS. Respondent appealed and, in an unpublished opinion, this Court affirmed the adjudication and disposition orders. In re A.N .M., –––N.C.App. ––––, 725 S.E.2d 473, 2012 N.C.App. LEXIS 540, 2012 WL 1514718 (May 1, 2012) (unpublished).
On 18 January 2012, DSS filed a petition to terminate respondent's parental rights, alleging as grounds: (1) neglect, N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7B–1111(a)(1); and (2) murder or voluntary manslaughter of the other parent of the juvenile, N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7B–1111(a)(8). Following a hearing on 12 September 2012, the trial court entered an order on 19 October 2012 concluding that both grounds existed to terminate respondent's parental rights. The trial court further determined that termination of respondent's parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7B–1110 was in Angela's best interest. Respondent gave timely notice of appeal.
Analysis
Respondent's counsel has filed a no-merit brief on respondent's behalf in which he states that he “has made a conscientious and thorough review of the record on appeal and conclude[d] that there is no issue which would alter the ultimate result.” Pursuant to North Carolina Rule of Appellate Procedure 3.1(d), he requests that this Court conduct an independent examination of the case. N.C. R.App. P. 3.1(d).
In accordance with Appellate Rule 3.1(d), counsel wrote respondent a letter on 1 February 2013 advising him of (1) counsel's inability to find error; (2) counsel's request for this Court to conduct an independent review of the record; and (3) respondent's right to file his own written arguments directly with this Court while the appeal is pending. Counsel attached to the letter a copy of the record, transcript, and no-merit brief. No written arguments have been filed with this Court by respondent.
In addition to seeking a review of the record pursuant to Rule 3.1(d), counsel also directs our attention to potential issues regarding the trial court's findings and conclusions of neglect under N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7B–1111(a)(1). Counsel, however, acknowledges that these issues would not alter the ultimate result as the evidence and the trial court's findings of fact based on that evidence support its conclusion that grounds for termination exist under N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7B–1111(a)(8). See In re J.M.W. & E.S.J.W., 179 N.C.App. 788, 791, 635 S.E.2d 916, 918–19 (2006) (holding that the trial court's “finding of any one of the ... enumerated grounds is sufficient to support a termination”) (citation and quotation marks omitted).
After carefully reviewing the transcript and record, we are unable to find any prejudicial error in the trial court's order. The trial court's findings of fact are supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence in the record and these findings support at least one of the grounds for termination. See In re Shepard, 162 N.C.App. 215, 221, 591 S.E.2d 1, 5, (acknowledging that appellate review of adjudication phase is limited to determining whether trial court's findings of fact are supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and whether those findings support its conclusions of law), disc. review denied,358 N.C. 543, 599 S.E.2d 42 (2004). Here, the trial court's determination that grounds existed under § 7B–1111(a)(8) to terminate respondent's parental rights is supported by comprehensive findings that respondent committed the murder of Angela's mother and that “this murder was not committed in self-defense” or under any other legal justification. We find that these findings are supported by the evidence presented.
We also conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in determining that termination is in the best interest of Angela. See id. at 222,591 S.E.2d 1, 591 S.E.2d at 6 (holding that standard of review for whether termination is in best interest of juvenile is abuse of discretion). In its order, the trial court made specific findings of fact addressing each of the criteria a court must consider before terminating a parent's rights. N.C. Gen.Stat. § 7B–1110(a) (2011). The court's findings reflect a reasoned decision based upon the requisite statutory factors listed in § 7B–1110(a).
Conclusion
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order terminating respondent's parental rights.
AFFIRMED. Judges ELMORE and McCULLOUGH concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).