In re A. H.

Syllabus

The respondent father appealed to this court from the judgments of the trial court terminating his parental rights with respect to his minor children, A and K. Following the court's adjudication of A as neglected, the court ordered the father and the respondent mother, C, to undergo a psychological evaluation conducted by L, a clinical psychologist. Fol- lowing K's birth, the petitioner, the Commissioner of Children and Fami- lies, filed a neglect petition for K, and the father and C both participated in an evaluation with R, a court-appointed psychological evaluator. At the start of the consolidated trial on the termination of parental rights petitions for both children and the neglect petition for K, counsel for C addressed the court regarding C's motion in limine. The motion, joined by the father's counsel, challenged various hearsay statements in the petitioner's exhibits, including, inter alia, statements or information within multiple social studies prepared by the Department of Children and Families and status reports that derived from L's evaluation. The trial court denied the motion and overruled the objections to the hearsay statements except with statements made by A, which the court con- cluded were not admissible. The court considered this information in both the adjudicatory and dispositional phases of the termination of parental rights proceedings and concluded that the father had failed to achieve such degree of personal rehabilitation as would encourage the belief that within a reasonable period of time, given and ages and needs of the children, he could assume a responsible position in their lives. On appeal, the father claimed, inter alia, that the court's reliance on the social studies submitted into evidence by the petitioner during the adjudicatory phase of the trial constituted both a violation of the applica- ble statute (§ 45a-717) and rule of practice (§ 35a-9). Held: 1. The trial court's use of and reliance on the social studies in the adj