Interest of T.H.

20110084 In the Interest of T.H., a child
-------------------
Heather Pautz, Barnes County
Director of Social Services, Petitioner and Appellee
v.
T.H., a Child, A.S., Mother,
K.H., Father, Respondents
-------------------
K.H., Father, Appellant

Appeal from: Juvenile Court, Southeast Judicial District, Barnes County
Judge John T. Paulson
Nature of Action: Juvenile Law
Counsel:
Appellant: Jonathan T. Garaas
Appellee: Bradley Allen Cruff , Asst. State's Attorney
Term: 11/2011   Argument: 11/16/2011  1:30pm
ND cite: 2012 ND 38
NW cite: 812 N.W.2d 373

Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Listen to recording of oral argument in RM format
using RealPlayer Basic,© a free download.

Issues: Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
1.Did the Juvenile Court ever acquire jurisdiction over the parties without proper service of process?
2.Did the Juvenile Court have the right to accept an Alford plea?
3.Did the Juvenile Court fail in its obligation to make a finding of deprivation upon legally admissible evidence?
4.Did the Juvenile Court make findings consistent with the "clear and convincing" standard?
5.Did the Juvenile Court have the right to extend custody orders longer than twenty-four months in an alleged deprivation case?
6.Did the Juvenile Court have the right to issue an order for continued custody by Barnes County Social Services when the child is not deprived.

Reply Brief Issues
Petitioner Heather Pautz, Barnes County Director of Social Services, acting through Assistant Barnes County State's Attorney Cruff ["PETITIONER"] does not express dissatisfaction with Appellant K.H.'s [hereinafter "FATHER"] statement(s) of issue on appeal. N.D.R.App.P. 28(c). However, PETITIONER asserts new issues on appeal, some of which assertions prove FATHER'S point(s) - jurisdiction over all parties is lacking, the court erred, the court misrepresented the procedural circumstances, and wrong standards are being advocated.

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
The Juvenile Court obtained personal jurisdiction of father, K.H., through service, personal and voluntary appearances.
It is harmless error when the correct standard of proof is stated by the Court on the record and an incorrect standard of proof is stated in the Court's written Findings of Fact of November 21, 2008.
The Court did not accept an Alford plea but rather a stipulation to the facts alleged in the petition as the basis for the finding of deprivation.
The consecutive duration of the various orders, roughly equal to three (3) years total in length, were entered pursuant to law.
T.H. remains a deprived child as a result of K.H.'s failure to make reasonable efforts to address the physical and emotional abuse that result in the continued deprivation of T.H.

Add Docket 20110084 RSS Add Docket 20110084 RSS

Docket entries:
103/31/2011 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 03/30/2011
203/31/2011 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 03/30/2011
303/31/2011 ----------CONFIDENTIAL----------
404/28/2011 Electronic RECORD ON APPEAL (entry nos. 1 - 88)
505/16/2011 MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT
605/16/2011 ACTION BY TRIAL COURT (MTR). Granted: 06/28/2011
705/20/2011 Electronic Supplemental Clerk's Certificate on Appeal (entry nos. 90-94)
806/02/2011 2nd Electronic Supplemental Clerk's Certificate of Appeal dated 6/1/11 (Entry No. 95-100).
906/13/2011 3rd Electronic Supplemental Clerk's Certificate of Record dated June 13, 2011 (Entry Nos. 101-103).
1006/24/2011 MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT (e-filed)
1106/24/2011 E-FILED MOTION (MTR)
1206/24/2011 ACTION BY CLERK (MTR). Granted: 07/19/2011
1306/30/2011 4th Electronic Supplemental Clerk's Certificate of Appeal dated June 30, 2011 (entry nos.104 & 105)
1407/19/2011 TRANSCRIPT DATED November 21, 2008; September 24, 2009; December 10, 2009; March 4, 2010;
1507/19/2011 August 19, 2010; August 25, 2010; August 31, 2010; December 2, 2010; December 3, 2010;
1607/19/2011 January 13, 2011; February 10, 2011; & March 2, 2011 (12 vols.) & Certificate of Service
1707/19/2011 DISK - tra (e-mailed) (11/21/08; 9/24/09; 12/10/09; 3/4/10; 8/19/10; 8/25/10; 8/31/10;
1807/19/2011 12/02/10; 12/03/10; 01/13/11; 02/10/11; & 03/02/11 (12 vols.)
1908/29/2011 APPELLANT BRIEF & ADDENDUM
2008/29/2011 APPELLANT APPENDIX
2109/06/2011 Received 8 copies each corrected title page for appellant's brief & appendix.
2209/06/2011 DISK-ATB
2309/28/2011 APPELLEE BRIEF (e-filed)
2409/28/2011 E-FILED BRIEF (AEB)
2509/30/2011 Received $25 surcharge for AEB (Receipt #20689)
2610/03/2011 Received 7 copies of AEB from CSD
2710/06/2011 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT
2810/17/2011 REPLY BRIEF of Appellant
2910/17/2011 DISK - ryb
3011/16/2011 APPEARANCES: Jonathan T. Garaas; Bradley A. Cruff
3111/16/2011 ARGUED: Jonathan T. Garaas; Bradley A. Cruff
3211/16/2011 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
3312/02/2011 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD ON APPEAL dated 12-2-11 (entry nos. 106 - 109)
3402/17/2012 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED
3502/17/2012 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Sandstrom, Dale V.
3602/22/2012 Judgment Sent to Parties
3702/29/2012 PETITION FOR REHEARING
3803/01/2012 DISK - PER
3903/15/2012 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT. Denied
4003/30/2012 MANDATE
4104/02/2012 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 07/28/2014