In the Interest of D.D.D.-H. a/k/a D.D.D.H., A.R.M., and O.N.H. a/k/a O.H., Children v. the State of Texas

Summary

The First Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed an order terminating the mother’s parental rights to three children. The court held that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support termination under Family Code sections 161.001(b)(1)(D) and (E) and to support the children’s best-interest finding, while concluding that former subsection (O) could not support the decree because the statute had been amended before the decree was signed. A separate concurring opinion emphasized that poverty, less-structured parenting, or isolated incidents of difficulty supervising children do not alone justify termination of parental rights.

Holdings

1. Legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that Mother knowingly placed or knowingly allowed the children to remain in conditions or surroundings that endangered their physical or emotional well-being.
2. Legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that Mother engaged in conduct, or knowingly placed the children with persons who engaged in conduct, that endangered their physical or emotional well-being.
3. Legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the trial court's finding that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the children's best interest.
4. Former Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(O) could not support the termination decree because the Legislature removed it as a predicate ground before the trial court signed the decree.

Questions Presented

1. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(D).
2. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(E).
3. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the finding that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the children's best interest.
4. Whether former Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(O) could support the termination decree after the Legislature removed that provision as a predicate ground before the decree was signed.

Disposition

affirmed