In re E.V.

Citations

• 2022 Ohio 4538

Syllabus

STANDING — CHILDREN — PERMANENT CUSTODY — R.C. 2151.414(B)(1) — R.C. 2151.353(A)(4) — R.C. 2151.414(E) — R.C. 2151.414(D)(1) — BEST INTEREST: Mother lacked standing to argue that father's due-process rights were violated by the trial court's failure to swear in the interpreter where father filed an appeal but did not raise the issue and mother did not assert any argument that she was injured or prejudiced by the alleged error. The trial court's determination under R.C. 2151.414(E) that the child could not be placed with one of the child's parents within a reasonable time or should not be placed with either parent was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the record reflects that, while father did complete a number of case-plan services, father failed to remedy the condition which caused the children's removal as father continued to deny drug use despite multiple positive test results throughout the pendency of the case, which created a barrier to reunification as father was prevented from engaging in substance-abuse treatment or progressing beyond supervised visits with the children, and continued to associate with mother who had a known issue with drug use. The trial court's best-interest determination was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the record reflects that, while the children were well bonded with father, the children were in need of a legally secure placement that could not be achieved without a grant of permanent custody to the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services as both children had been in the temporary custody of the agency since shortly after birth and father continued to deny drug use despite multiple positive test results throughout the pendency of the case and continued to associate with mother who was viewed as a risk to the children due to drug use.