Case ID: or-app_275/html/0569-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Submitted October 7,
    affirmed December 16, 2015,
    petition for review denied March 3, 2016 (358 Or 794)
    In the Matter of C. A. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. M. L. S., Appellant. In the Matter of P. R. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. M. L. S., Appellant. In the Matter of M. M. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. M. L. S., Appellant. 
      In the Matter of P. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. K. M., Appellant. In the Matter of M. M., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Respondent, v. K. M., Appellant.
    
    
      Multnomah County Circuit Court
    14JU01721;
    Petition Number 110701;
    A159219 (Control)
    Multnomah County Circuit Court
    14JU01723;
    Petition Number 110703;
    A159220
    Multnomah County Circuit Court
    14JU01725;
    A159221
    Petition Number 110703;
    
      Multnomah County Circuit Court
    14JU01724;
    A159364
    Petition Number 110703;
    Multnomah County Circuit Court
    14JU01726;
    Petition Number 110703;
    A159364
    364 P3d 358
    Megan L. Jacquot filed the brief for appellant K. M.
    Shannon Storey, Chief Defender, Juvenile Appellate Section, and Shannon Flowers, Deputy Public Defender, filed the brief for appellant M. L. S.
    Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Paul L. Smith, Deputy Solicitor General, and Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
    Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Lagesen, Judge, and Wilson, Judge pro tempore.
    
      PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM.

In this consolidated appeal, mother and father appeal a juvenile court judgment terminating their parental rights to their children. Mother’s appeal relates to all three children, and father’s appeal relates only to the two youngest children. The juvenile court found that termination of mother and father’s parental rights was in the best interest of all three children under both ORS 419B.504 (“by reason of conduct or condition seriously detrimental to the child”) and ORS 419B.506 (“parents have failed or neglected without reasonable and lawful cause to provide for the basic physical and psychological needs of the child”).

An extended discussion of the facts in this case would not benefit the bench, the bar, or the public. On de novo review, ORS 19.415(3)(a), we conclude that the juvenile court properly terminated mother and father’s parental rights for unfitness under ORS 419B.504. Given our disposition, we do not reach the merits of the juvenile court’s termination of parental rights on the alternative ground of neglect under ORS 419B.506.

Affirmed.