Case Title: In re J.I.T.

Citation: 

Docket Number: 333A21

State: north-carolina

Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

Date: 2021-12-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA 
2021-NCSC-151 
No. 333A21 
Filed 17 December 2021 
IN THE MATTER OF: J.I.T.  
 
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7B-1001(a1)(1) from an order entered on 18 
March 2021 by Judge Ellen Shelley in District Court, Rutherford County.  This 
matter was calendared for argument in the Supreme Court on 6 December 2021 but 
was determined on the record and briefs without oral argument pursuant to Rule 
30(f) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. 
 
W. Martin  Jarrad, for petitioner-mother.  
 
Edward Eldred, for respondent-appellant. 
 
 
 
BERGER, Justice. 
 
 
¶ 1 
 
Respondent, the father of J.I.T. (Joe),1 appeals from the trial court’s order 
terminating his parental rights.  Respondent’s counsel filed a no-merit brief pursuant 
to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.  After review, we 
conclude the purported issues addressed by counsel in support of the appeal are 
meritless and therefore affirm the trial court’s order. 
                                            
1 A pseudonym is used in this opinion to protect the identity of the juvenile and for 
ease of reading. 
IN RE J.I.T. 
2021-NCSC-151 
Opinion of the Court 
 
 
 
¶ 2 
 
Joe was born on April 22, 2012.  Joe’s mother filed a petition to terminate 
respondent’s parental rights on June 1, 2020, alleging as grounds for termination that 
respondent willfully abandoned Joe and willfully failed to pay costs of his care and 
maintenance.  A hearing on the petition to terminate parental rights was held on 
March 8, 2021.  Respondent failed to appear at the hearing.  Respondent’s counsel 
moved to continue the hearing, which the trial court denied.  
¶ 3 
 
Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the trial court made the 
following findings of fact: 
6. The Respondent had sporadic contact with the minor 
child prior to the ending of the relationship between the 
Petitioner and the Respondent when the minor child was 
seven months old. Since that time, the only contact the 
Respondent had with the minor child consisted of the 
Respondent attending the minor child’s second birthday 
and spending approximately and [sic] hour with the minor 
child and the Petitioner at a park when the minor child was 
two years old. Since that time, and prior to the filing of the 
petition in this matter, the Respondent has been in the 
presence of the minor child in public settings, once even 
passing by the minor child and the Petitioner on the same 
aisle at Wal Mart [sic], and during none of these times in a 
public setting did the Respondent ever make any attempt 
at communication with the minor child or even 
acknowledge him. The Respondent has never established a 
parent-child relationship with the minor child, or any 
emotional bond. 
7. At the time of the filing of this action, the Respondent 
had willfully abandoned the juvenile for at least six 
consecutive months immediately preceding the filing of 
this petition. 
IN RE J.I.T. 
2021-NCSC-151 
Opinion of the Court 
 
 
 
8. The Respondent was ordered to pay for the support of 
the minor child in Rutherford County file number 13 CVD 
222. For a period of one year or more next preceding the 
filing of the Petition in this matter, the Respondent has 
willfully failed without justification to pay for the care, 
support, and education of the minor child as required by 
the above-referenced child support order. Specifically, as of 
the date of this order, the last child support payment made 
by the Respondent for the support of the minor child was 
in the amount of $18.29 on March 13, 2019. 
9. The Respondent father has willfully abandoned the 
minor child for at least six consecutive months 
immediately preceding the filing of this action. 
10. Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 7B-1111(4), and (7), the 
foregoing facts support and justify the termination of 
Respondent’s parental rights. 
 
The trial court concluded that termination was in Joe’s best interests.  Respondent 
appeals. 
¶ 4 
 
Respondent’s appellate counsel states that he has reviewed the record and 
discussed the case with the Office of the Parent Defender.  Counsel could not identify 
a meritorious issue for appeal, and he subsequently filed a no-merit brief on 
respondent’s behalf under Rule 3.1(e) of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.   
¶ 5 
 
Counsel for respondent identified three issues that could arguably support an 
appeal here.   Counsel states that the trial court’s finding of willful abandonment was 
not supported by the evidence.  Counsel acknowledges, however, that the issue lacks 
merit because the independent finding of willful failure to pay child support is 
IN RE J.I.T. 
2021-NCSC-151 
Opinion of the Court 
 
 
 
evidence which supports a finding justifying termination of parental rights.  Second, 
counsel also asserts that another issue on appeal could be that the trial court abused 
its discretion when it denied counsel’s motion to continue.  Regarding this issue, 
counsel acknowledges, however, that respondent failed to preserve any argument 
related to lack of notice and the denial of the motion to continue.  Finally, counsel 
states that respondent may have an argument related to ineffective assistance of 
counsel, but that, in his opinion, this issue likewise lacks merit.  Counsel concedes 
that respondent “cannot show a probability of a different result given [the] testimony 
concerning the status of [respondent]’s child support payments.”   
¶ 6 
 
Counsel has advised respondent and provided him with the documents 
necessary to pursue his appeal.  Respondent was appropriately notified of his right 
to file pro se written arguments on his own behalf pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) and he has 
failed to file a brief or any additional documents with this Court.  
¶ 7 
 
This Court conducts an independent review of issues identified by respondent’s 
counsel in a no-merit brief filed under Rule 3.1(e).  In re L.E.M., 372 N.C. 396, 402, 
831 S.E.2d 341, 345 (2019).  We have carefully reviewed the issues identified by 
counsel in the no-merit brief in light of the entire record.  We are satisfied that the 
trial court’s order terminating respondent’s parental rights was supported by clear, 
cogent, and convincing evidence and based upon proper legal grounds.  Accordingly, 
we affirm the trial court’s order terminating respondent’s parental rights.  
IN RE J.I.T. 
2021-NCSC-151 
Opinion of the Court 
 
 
 
AFFIRMED.