In the Matter of the Termination of Parental Rights to CS and TS, Minor Children

Summary

The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed a jury verdict terminating LS's parental rights to her two minor children under statutory grounds involving abuse, neglect, rehabilitation failure, and foster-care duration. The court held that clear and convincing evidence supported findings of abuse and neglect based on inappropriate physical punishment, unsafe confinement, inadequate nutrition and medical care, and failure to comply with case plans. The court also held that any due process error arising from LS's absence on the first day of trial after DFS declined to provide transportation was harmless.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find by clear and convincing evidence that LS abused and neglected the children. Confining an eight-month-old child in a tied fleece bag created an imminent risk of physical injury, pinching a child's fingers until he screamed constituted excessive or unreasonable corporal punishment, and the evidence of inadequate nutrition, inadequate medical care, and failure to comply with the case plan supported neglect.
2. LS was not denied due process because she had a meaningful opportunity to be heard: she appeared during the second and third days of trial, testified about her absence, and did not request a continuance. Even assuming DFS had incurred an obligation to provide transportation, LS failed to establish prejudice.
3. Any error arising from DFS's withdrawal of transportation was harmless because LS did not request a continuance, was able to explain her absence to the jury, and did not show that the error affected a substantial right.

Questions Presented

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence established that LS abused or neglected CS and TS under the statutory definitions of abuse and neglect.
2. Whether LS was denied due process and a meaningful opportunity to be heard when DFS withdrew its offer to transport her to the first day of the termination trial.
3. Whether any error resulting from LS's absence on the first trial day was prejudicial.

Disposition

affirmed