In re Interest of Aaron D.; State of Nebraska v. Lorena D.

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court considers the termination of Lorena D.'s parental rights to Aaron D. based solely on the statutory ground that Aaron had been in out-of-home placement for 15 of the most recent 22 months. The court examines whether clear and convincing evidence established that termination was in Aaron's best interests, focusing on the evidentiary weight of hearsay testimony, the mother's progress under the reunification plan, and the child's relationships with family members. The opinion also addresses related constitutional, evidentiary, jurisdictional, and Vienna Convention arguments.

Holdings

1. The State failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Lorena D.'s parental rights was in Aaron's best interests, so the termination order had to be reversed.
2. The State could not rely on Lorena's alleged noncompliance with rehabilitation requirements as clear and convincing evidence supporting termination because the record did not contain the dispositional orders or sufficient evidence establishing the court-ordered plan and the reasonableness of its requirements.
3. The court did not decide whether consular notification under the Vienna Convention was jurisdictional because the record contained no evidence showing whether the State had notified the Mexican consulate.

Questions Presented

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence established that termination of Lorena D.'s parental rights was in Aaron D.'s best interests when the State proceeded solely under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-292(7).
2. Whether the record contained sufficient evidence to assess Lorena's alleged noncompliance with rehabilitation and case-plan requirements.
3. Whether the State's failure to notify the Mexican consulate under the Vienna Convention deprived the juvenile court of jurisdiction.

Disposition

reversed