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: |
|
| Term: |
11/2011 Argument: 11/16/2011 01:30pm
|
| ND cite: |
2012 ND 38
|
| NW cite: |
812 N.W.2d 373
Listen to recording of oral argument
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
|
| 1 | | 03/31/2011 | |
NOTICE OF APPEAL: 03/30/2011 |
| 2 | | 03/31/2011 | |
ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 03/30/2011 |
| 3 | | 03/31/2011 | |
----------CONFIDENTIAL---------- |
| 4 | | 04/28/2011 | |
Electronic RECORD ON APPEAL (entry nos. 1 - 88) |
| 5 | | 05/16/2011 | |
MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT |
| 6 | | 05/16/2011 | |
ACTION BY TRIAL COURT (MTR). Granted: 06/28/2011 |
| 7 | | 05/20/2011 | |
Electronic Supplemental Clerk's Certificate on Appeal (entry nos. 90-94) |
| 8 | | 06/02/2011 | |
2nd Electronic Supplemental Clerk's Certificate of Appeal dated 6/1/11 (Entry No. 95-100). |
| 9 | | 06/13/2011 | |
3rd Electronic Supplemental Clerk's Certificate of Record dated June 13, 2011 (Entry Nos. 101-103). |
| 10 | | 06/24/2011 | |
MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT (e-filed) |
| 11 | | 06/24/2011 | |
E-FILED MOTION (MTR) |
| 12 | | 06/24/2011 | |
ACTION BY CLERK (MTR). Granted: 07/19/2011 |
| 13 | | 06/30/2011 | |
4th Electronic Supplemental Clerk's Certificate of Appeal dated June 30, 2011 (entry nos.104 & 105) |
| 14 | | 07/19/2011 | |
TRANSCRIPT DATED November 21, 2008; September 24, 2009; December 10, 2009; March 4, 2010; |
| 15 | | 07/19/2011 | |
August 19, 2010; August 25, 2010; August 31, 2010; December 2, 2010; December 3, 2010; |
| 16 | | 07/19/2011 | |
January 13, 2011; February 10, 2011; & March 2, 2011 (12 vols.) & Certificate of Service |
| 17 | | 07/19/2011 | |
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; |
| 18 | | 07/19/2011 | |
12/02/10; 12/03/10; 01/13/11; 02/10/11; & 03/02/11 (12 vols.) |
| 19 | | 08/29/2011 | |
APPELLANT BRIEF & ADDENDUM |
| 20 | | 08/29/2011 | |
APPELLANT APPENDIX |
| 21 | | 09/06/2011 | |
Received 8 copies each corrected title page for appellant's brief & appendix. |
| 22 | | 09/06/2011 | |
DISK-ATB |
| 23 | | 09/28/2011 | |
APPELLEE BRIEF (e-filed) |
| 24 | | 09/28/2011 | |
E-FILED BRIEF (AEB) |
| 25 | | 09/30/2011 | |
Received $25 surcharge for AEB (Receipt #20689) |
| 26 | | 10/03/2011 | |
Received 7 copies of AEB from CSD |
| 27 | | 10/06/2011 | |
NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT |
| 28 | | 10/17/2011 | |
REPLY BRIEF of Appellant |
| 29 | | 10/17/2011 | |
DISK - ryb |
| 30 | | 11/16/2011 | |
APPEARANCES: Jonathan T. Garaas; Bradley A. Cruff |
| 31 | | 11/16/2011 | |
ARGUED: Jonathan T. Garaas; Bradley A. Cruff |
| 32 | | 11/16/2011 | |
ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST |
| 33 | | 12/02/2011 | |
ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD ON APPEAL dated 12-2-11 (entry nos. 106 - 109) |
| 34 | | 02/17/2012 | |
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED |
| 35 | | 02/17/2012 | |
UNANIMOUS OPINION: Sandstrom, Dale V. |
| 36 | | 02/22/2012 | |
Judgment Sent to Parties |
| 37 | | 02/29/2012 | |
PETITION FOR REHEARING |
| 38 | | 03/01/2012 | |
DISK - PER |
| 39 | | 03/15/2012 | |
ACTION BY SUPREME COURT. Denied |
| 40 | | 03/30/2012 | |
MANDATE |
| 41 | | 04/02/2012 | |
RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE |