M.P.G. v. Department of Family and Protective Services; In the Interest of R.R., a Child

Summary

The First Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the termination of a mother's parental rights to R.R. The court rejected challenges concerning a continuance, admission of family-service-plan and medical records, caseworker testimony, trial procedure, appointment of counsel, and the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence supporting the child's best interest. The court concluded that the mother's failure to protect the child from abuse, delay in obtaining medical care, and lack of safe and stable caregiving supported termination.

Holdings

1. The mother preserved her challenge to the denial of the continuance because counsel presented specific grounds and secured an express or implicit ruling in the record.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mother's motion for continuance based on counsel's late retention, the mother's alleged confusion, and the asserted need for additional preparation.
3. The mother's challenges to exhibits 1, 2, 6, and 7 were waived because she failed to make timely and specific objections at trial.
4. The trial court acted within its discretion in admitting the family service plan because it qualified as a public record and was required by statute to be filed with the court.
5. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting R.R.'s medical records as business records.
6. The trial court did not err in allowing McCartney to testify about facts reflected in R.R.'s medical records because she did not offer independent medical opinions, and the mother also waived the objection by allowing the same or similar evidence without objection.
7. The mother presented no preserved appellate issue concerning the trial court's management of the order of witnesses.
8. The trial court was not required to appoint counsel for the mother because she did not seek appointment, did not file an affidavit of indigence, and appeared with counsel at trial.
9. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court's finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination of the mother's parental rights was in R.R.'s best interest.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying the mother's motion for continuance.
2. Whether the mother's challenges to the admission of Department exhibits were preserved and, for preserved objections, whether the family service plan and medical records were admissible.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by allowing the caseworker to testify about facts reflected in R.R.'s medical records.
4. Whether the trial court improperly deviated from the traditional order of witnesses and trial procedure.
5. Whether the trial court was required to appoint an attorney ad litem or other counsel for the mother before trial.
6. Whether the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of the mother's parental rights was in R.R.'s best interest.

Disposition

affirmed