James Allen Brickley, Jr. v. Marie Laurence Gloria Joseph-Stephen

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, affirmed an order terminating the father's parental rights under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(Q) and the statutory best-interest requirement. The court held that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient, that the father's motion for continuance did not preserve error because it lacked a supporting affidavit, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by proceeding without a jury.

Holdings

1. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to establish that Father knowingly engaged in criminal conduct resulting in conviction and imprisonment and would be unable to care for the child for at least two years from the petition's filing. Once the petitioner established the first subsection-Q prong, Father had to produce some evidence of how he would provide or arrange care; evidence that Mother was caring for the child did not satisfy that burden because she was caring for the child in place of, rather than on behalf of, Father.
2. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination was in the child's best interest.
3. Father did not preserve error concerning denial of the continuance because his written motion lacked the supporting affidavit required by Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 251.
4. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying Father's jury demand and proceeding with a bench trial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether legally and factually sufficient evidence supported termination under Texas Family Code section 161.001(b)(1)(Q) and the statutory best-interest requirement.
2. Whether the trial court erred by denying Father's motion for a continuance to conduct discovery.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by proceeding with a bench trial after denying Father's jury demand.

Disposition

affirmed