D'Anna P. v. Dcs, A.D. ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                      NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.
    UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL
    AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
    IN THE
    ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS
    DIVISION ONE
    D'ANNA P.,
    Appellant,
    v.
    DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SAFETY, A.D.,
    Appellees.
    No. 1 CA-JV 17-0088
    FILED 10-5-2017
    Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
    No. JD29433; JS18397
    The Honorable Bruce R. Cohen, Judge
    The Honorable Jacki Ireland, Judge Pro Tempore
    AFFIRMED
    COUNSEL
    David W. Bell, Attorney at Law, Mesa
    By David W. Bell
    Counsel for Appellant
    Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix
    By JoAnn Falgout
    Counsel for Appellee DCS
    D'ANNA P. v. DCS, A.D.
    Decision of the Court
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Presiding Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court, in
    which Judge Jennifer B. Campbell and Judge Margaret H. Downie joined.
    B R O W N, Judge:
    ¶1             In March 2016, the Department of Child Safety ("DCS") filed
    in the superior court a petition for termination of Mother's parental rights
    to her child, A.D., based on grounds of abandonment and 15 months in an
    out-of-home placement. Mother, who was residing in Tennessee at the
    time, failed to appear telephonically at a subsequent status conference.
    Although her counsel noted an objection to proceeding in Mother's absence,
    the court found no good cause "at least as of this point" for Mother's
    nonappearance. The court explained that Mother's counsel could file a
    proper motion if he later discovered Mother had good cause for her failure
    to appear. After considering evidence presented by DCS, the court found
    that DCS met its burden of proving both grounds alleged in the petition.
    ¶2             Mother timely appeals from the superior court's termination
    order. She argues the court erred, and denied her due process, in finding
    that she failed to appear at the status conference without good cause.
    ¶3             The superior court may proceed in a parent's absence and
    terminate parental rights "based on the record and evidence presented" if
    the parent failed to appear "without good cause," had adequate notice of
    the hearing, and was admonished that failure to appear could constitute a
    waiver of parental rights and an admission of the allegations in the petition.
    Arizona Revised Statutes section 8–537(C); see also Ariz. R.P. Juv. Ct. 64(C).
    A parent shows good cause for failing to appear by proving "(1) mistake,
    inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect exists and (2) a meritorious
    defense to the claim exists." Christy A. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ. Sec., 
    217 Ariz. 299
    , 304, ¶ 16 (App. 2007). We review the court's finding that a parent failed
    to appear without good cause for an abuse of discretion. Adrian E. v. Ariz.
    Dep't of Econ. Sec., 
    215 Ariz. 96
    , 101, ¶ 15 (App. 2007).
    ¶4           Mother argues, for the first time, that she did not receive
    proper notice of the hearing. Her argument, however, is based solely on an
    alleged communication between Mother's trial counsel and her appellate
    counsel suggesting a letter addressed to Mother had been returned. Neither
    2
    D'ANNA P. v. DCS, A.D.
    Decision of the Court
    the alleged communication nor the letter are part of the superior court
    record and therefore we will not consider them. Ashton-Blair v. Merrill, 
    187 Ariz. 315
    , 317 (App. 1996) ("We may only consider the matters in the record
    before us. As to matters not in our record, we presume that the record
    before the trial court supported its decision.").
    ¶5             Without any evidence to support her argument, Mother has
    failed to meet her burden of showing the superior court abused its
    discretion. Indeed, Mother does not argue on appeal that she had good
    cause for failing to appear at the status conference. She does not point to
    anything in the record suggesting she did not have proper notice nor does
    she assert a meritorious defense to the petition for termination.
    Accordingly, we affirm the superior court's order terminating Mother's
    parental rights to A.D.
    AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
    FILED: AA
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1 CA-JV 17-0088

Filed Date: 10/5/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/5/2017