Skip to main content

In re L.D.

Citations

  • 2025 Ohio 2892

Syllabus

An incarcerated parent's due process rights are adequately protected, even if he does not attend a permanent custody hearing pertaining to his children, where he was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings, his counsel adequately conveyed the parent's interest in reunifying with his children in the future and proffered the parent's expected testimony on the record. Counsel is not ineffective where there is no evidence to demonstrate that counsel's performance created an unjust result or that the proceeding would have been different. A children's services agency engages in reasonable case planning where it creates a case plan that, if completed along with the necessary behavioral changes, could reunify the family. The juvenile court's decision awarding permanent custody of Mother's children to a children's services agency is supported by sufficient evidence and the greater weight of the evidence where the agency established that Mother had not remedied the concerns that led to the children's removal and that the children could not be placed with Mother within a reasonable time period. The juvenile court did not err in failing to sua sponte order a six-month extension of temporary custody pursuant to R.C. 2151.415(D) where there is no evidence to support that the children could be reunified with Mother within a reasonable time. WITH DISSENT IN PART AND CONCURRENCE IN PART.

Judges: Hendrickson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

42 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.