Mariah B. v. State of Alaska, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's Services

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court reviewed a mother’s appeal from termination of her parental rights, focusing on the admission of hearsay testimony by an Office of Children’s Services supervisor. The court held that the mother preserved her evidentiary objection, but the superior court had not explained the basis or permitted purposes of the hearsay ruling or how the testimony supported its termination findings. The court remanded for further explanation and retained jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. The mother preserved her objection to the OCS supervisor's hearsay testimony because the superior court definitively ruled that the testimony was admissible, assured her that she was not waiving the objection, and did not instruct her to renew the objection to each question.
2. The record was inadequate to determine whether the superior court properly admitted or relied on the supervisor's hearsay testimony, so the case had to be remanded for an explanation of the evidentiary rulings and their relationship to the termination findings.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the mother preserved her hearsay objection to the OCS supervisor's testimony by making standing and continuing objections rather than objecting to every question.
2. Whether the appellate record was adequate to determine whether the superior court properly admitted and relied on the supervisor's hearsay testimony under CINA Rule 18(f) or another hearsay exception.

Disposition

remanded