CINA

IN RE: TRISTAN N. (access required)

Juvenile law — CINA — Termination of parental rights Steven N. (“Father”), appellant, appeals from an order of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, sitting as a juvenile court. The court granted the petition filed by the Baltimore City Department ...

Read More »

IN RE: JULIEANA G. D.

Juvenile law -- CINA -- Determining factors On September 24, 2014, following a hearing in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Julieana G.D. (“Julieana”), the child of Diana G. (“Mother”) and Dion D. (“Father”) was found to be a child in need of assistance (“CINA”). The court placed Julieana in the care and custody of Mother under an Order of Protective Supervision (“OPS”), which included certain specific conditions to be supervised by the court and the Montgomery County Department of Health and Human Services (“the Department”). Mother filed a timely appeal of the court’s CINA finding and presents a single question for review: “Did the trial court err in determining that Julieana was a CINA?”

Read More »

IN RE: KATERINE L. AND ALEX F. (access required)

Appellant, Mr. B., and Appellee, Ms. B. (“Mother”), were married on August 30, 2000. Although the couple parted ways soon thereafter, neither party sought a divorce prior to the current controversy. In the years since they were married, Mother has given birth to five children; four of those during the time the couple was estranged.

Read More »

In Re: Emilee G., Devin G., & Bella G. (access required)

Given the mother’s drug addiction and relapse into active drug use, the father’s inability to react appropriately to the children’s safety and health issues, and the juvenile court’s consideration of all the statutory factors, it was not an abuse of discretion to change the permanency plan for three CINAs from reunification to adoption by a nonrelative.

Read More »

In Re: Adalia R., Hailey R., & Miles R. (access required)

Did the circuit court err in changing the permanency plan from reunification to guardianship/adoption, where, inter alia, the court made clearly erroneous findings about the mother’s mental health, the parents had made substantial progress in satisfying their service agreements, and the children continued to bond well with them?

Read More »

In Re: Sunshyne E. and Noah I. (access required)

Given the mother’s history of abusing daughter, daughter’s reaction to testifying against mother and mother’s lengthy involvement with DSS, the circuit court acted well within its discretion when it responded to daughter’s anxiety about resuming overnight visits by suspending those visits, while otherwise continuing unsupervised visits and the permanency plan of reunification.

Read More »