State of Utah in the Interest of W.A.

Summary

The Utah Supreme Court affirmed a juvenile court order terminating D.A.'s parental rights to W.A. The court held that Utah law and the Fourteenth Amendment permitted the juvenile court to exercise jurisdiction over the nonresident parent under the status exception. It also addressed the admissibility of evidence relating to D.A.'s nolo contendere conviction and a prior juvenile court adjudication.

Holdings

1. Utah Code section 78-3a-110(13) confers personal jurisdiction over a nonresident parent in a parental-termination proceeding when the child is present in Utah when the proceeding begins and the parent receives the required notice.
2. The exercise of personal jurisdiction over a nonresident parent in this parental-rights termination proceeding complied with the Fourteenth Amendment because termination proceedings adjudicate the legal status of the child-parent relationship and the proceeding provided adequate notice and procedural safeguards.
3. Utah Rule of Evidence 410(2) does not bar admission of a conviction resulting from a nolo contendere plea when the conviction is offered to show the fact and length of incarceration rather than to prove that the defendant committed the underlying offense.
4. Utah Rule of Evidence 803(22) does not affirmatively bar admission of a conviction resulting from a nolo contendere plea; although the conviction does not qualify for the Rule 803(22) hearsay exception, it may be admissible under another exception.
5. Any error in admitting or taking judicial notice of the February 25, 1998, adjudication order was nonprejudicial because D.A. stipulated to the only fact for which the State offered the order: that the State had custody of W.A.
6. The juvenile court properly denied D.A.'s motion to amend because D.A. failed to marshal the evidence challenging the abandonment finding, and abandonment alone independently supported termination of her parental rights.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Utah law and the Fourteenth Amendment permitted the juvenile court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident parent in a parental-rights termination proceeding.
2. Whether Utah Rule of Evidence 410(2) barred admission of a conviction resulting from a nolo contendere plea when offered to show the fact and duration of incarceration rather than the underlying criminal conduct.
3. Whether Utah Rule of Evidence 803(22) barred admission of the conviction and whether the conviction was admissible under Rule 803(8).
4. Whether admitting or taking judicial notice of the February 25, 1998, adjudication order violated D.A.'s confrontation or due-process rights.
5. Whether the juvenile court properly denied D.A.'s motion to amend the termination order where she failed to marshal the evidence challenging the abandonment finding.

Disposition

affirmed