- 302 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

In re Interest of Jay’Oni W. et al., 

children under 18 years of age.

State of Nebraska, appellee, v. 

Breyonna W., appellant.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed August 30, 2022. No. A-21-990.

1. Juvenile Courts: Evidence: Appeal and Error. An appellate court 

reviews juvenile cases de novo on the record and reaches its conclusions independently of the findings made by the juvenile court below. 

However, when the evidence is in conflict, an appellate court may 

consider and give weight to the fact that the juvenile court observed the 

witnesses and accepted one version of the facts over another.

2. Parental Rights: Proof. Terminating parental rights requires both clear 

and convincing evidence that one of the statutory grounds enumerated in 

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-292 (Reissue 2016) exists and clear and convincing 

evidence that termination is in the best interests of the children.

3. Evidence: Words and Phrases. Clear and convincing evidence means 

and is that amount of evidence which produces in the trier of fact a 

firm belief or conviction about the existences of a fact to be proven. It 

is more than a preponderance of evidence, but less than proof beyond a 

reasonable doubt.

4. Parental Rights: Proof. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-292(7) (Reissue 2016) 

operates mechanically and does not require the State to adduce evidence 

of any specific fault on the part of the parent.

5. ____: ____. Any one of the bases for termination codified by Neb. Rev. 

Stat. § 43-292 (Reissue 2016) can serve as a basis for termination of 

parental rights when coupled with evidence that termination is in the 

best interests of the children.

6. Parental Rights. When a parent is unable or unwilling to rehabilitate 

himself or herself within a reasonable period of time, the child’s best 

interests require termination of parental rights.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

09/06/2022 09:06 AM CDT
- 303 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

7. Parental Rights: Time. The 15-month condition contained in Neb. Rev. 

Stat. § 43-292(7) (Reissue 2016) provides a reasonable timetable for 

parents to rehabilitate themselves.

8. Parental Rights. Children cannot, and should not, be suspended in foster care or be made to await uncertain parental maturity.

Appeal from the Separate Juvenile Court of Douglas County: 

Amy N. Schuchman, Judge. Affirmed.

Thomas C. Riley, Douglas County Public Defender, and 

Lauren A. Walag for appellant.

Kristin Huber, Deputy Douglas County Attorney, and 

Traemon Anderson, Senior Certified Law Student, for appellee.

Pirtle, Chief Judge, and Bishop and Welch, Judges.

Pirtle, Chief Judge.

INTRODUCTION

Breyonna W. appeals from an order of the separate juvenile 

court of Douglas County terminating her parental rights with 

respect to one of her minor children, Jasmine W. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

We are tasked with reviewing the termination of Breyonna’s 

parental rights with respect to her daughter Jasmine, born in 

2013. However, Jasmine is only one of three children involved 

in the underlying juvenile court proceedings, as Breyonna is 

also the biological mother of Jasmine’s two younger sisters, 

Ja’Niyah W., born in 2018, and Jay’Oni W., born in 2020. All 

three children resided with Breyonna until they were removed 

from Breyonna’s care in March 2020. Thereafter, all three 

children were placed together in a kinship foster home, and 

despite Ja’Niyah’s being placed with her father for a period 

of time, all three children remained placed together as of the 

termination hearings in September and October 2021. As far as 

we are aware, all three children continue to reside together in 
- 304 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

a kinship foster home, and Breyonna’s parental rights remain 

intact with respect to Ja’Niyah and Jay’Oni. Thus, while 

Ja’Niyah and Jay’Oni will be discussed only as necessary to 

address Breyonna’s claims with respect to Jasmine, this case 

presents the rather unique circumstance of three siblings that 

have experienced more or less the same progression through 

the juvenile court system, yet only one of the three has so 

far been subjected to the termination of her mother’s parental rights.

The present case arose out of an incident on March 22, 

2020, in which Breyonna reportedly sent her mother a message 

threatening to kill Ja’Niyah because Ja’Niyah called Breyonna 

a “‘FAT ASS Bitch.’” In response, Breyonna’s mother called 

law enforcement to conduct a welfare check of the three children, and the responding officers observed the following:

The house had trash piled up in the corners, trash 

and dirt all over the floor making it difficult to move 

around, open containers of food and beverages were littered around the entire house, dirty laundry was piled 

up in every room, the bathroom had not been cleaned in 

sometime [sic], used femine [sic] hygeine [sic] products 

were on the floor, unknown bugs were crawling around 

the bathroom, the floors and walls had been drawn on and 

damaged, mold was observed in open containers, there 

was one bed for all 4 people, and the house smelled of 

stale and old food.

All the children were dressed in dirty clothes and did 

not smell clean.

On March 24, 2020, based on the foregoing, the State filed 

an ex parte motion for immediate temporary custody and a 

juvenile petition alleging that the three children came within 

the meaning of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-247(3)(a) (Reissue 2016), 

in that they lacked proper parental care by reason of the fault 

or habits of Breyonna. The juvenile court granted the ex parte 

motion and ordered the Nebraska Department of Health and 

Human Services to take temporary custody of the children.
- 305 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

Cheyenne Wilson, who was the case manager for this family throughout the life of the case, later testified that all three 

children were initially placed in the home of Breyonna’s 

grandmother. The children remained in that home from March 

to December 2020, at which point they were placed in the 

home of Jasmine’s paternal great-aunt. Although Ja’Niyah 

was apparently placed for a time in the home of her father, 

Wilson testified that at the time of the termination hearings, all 

three children were placed in the home of Jasmine’s paternal 

great-aunt.

On April 1, 2020, the court found probable cause to support the State’s juvenile petition and ordered that the children remain in the temporary custody of the department. 

Additionally, the court entered a number of orders regarding 

services for Breyonna and the children. The court ordered that 

Breyonna “shall have reasonable rights of agency supervised 

family time/visitation as arranged by the [department]” and 

“invited” Breyonna to engage in a number of additional services. The court further ordered that “St. Francis is to arrange 

and provide for services for [Breyonna] as she has indicated 

she is willing to participate in these services.”

On June 11, 2020, Breyonna admitted to “Count I-B and 

Count I-C” of the juvenile petition in exchange for the State’s 

dismissal of the remaining counts. Specifically, Breyonna 

admitted that “[o]n or about March 22, 2020, law enforcement officials observed the family home . . . to be in a filthy, 

unwholesome condition placing said juveniles at risk of harm,” 

and that she “has failed to provide proper parental care, support and/or supervision for said juveniles.” Thus, the juvenile 

court entered an order finding, by a preponderance of the 

evidence, that all three children were within the meaning 

of § 43-247(3)(a). The court ordered that Breyonna “shall” 

attend a psychiatric appointment for medication evaluation, 

complete a parenting assessment, participate in family support 

services, participate in agency supervised visitation, complete 

a co-occurring evaluation, and sign releases of information 
- 306 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

“between her probation officer and St. Francis.” On July 

30, the juvenile court additionally ordered Breyonna to participate in parent-child interactive therapy with Jay’Oni and 

Jasmine, undergo a psychological evaluation with a parenting 

assessment, undergo a psychiatric evaluation, maintain a stable 

source of income, maintain adequate housing, participate in 

a domestic violence course, and submit to random urinalysis 

drug testing.

On December 2, 2020, the juvenile court entered an order 

largely reiterating the previously ordered services, with the 

exception of the psychological evaluation and the co-occurring 

evaluation, as Breyonna completed those evaluations in October 

and November 2020 respectively. As a result of the psychological evaluation, Breyonna was recommended to participate in 

trauma-based therapy, which the court added to the ordered 

services. As a result of the co-occurring evaluation, Breyonna 

was recommended to participate in “Level 2.1 [o]utpatient 

treatment,” which the court added to the ordered services. On 

March 29, 2021, the juvenile court entered an order reiterating 

the same ordered services. Although the ordered services still 

included a psychiatric evaluation, Wilson later testified that 

Breyonna completed the psychiatric evaluation in February 

2021 and that she was recommended “to continue with medication management and to take the prescribed medication and 

return on a monthly basis.”

On April 7, 2021, the guardian ad litem for the children 

filed an ex parte motion to suspend visitation. The motion 

was based on an affidavit from a “visitation and family support worker” “outlining her concerns regarding [Breyonna’s] 

visitation, including [Breyonna’s] being unable to control her 

emotions during visits, repeatedly inspecting [Ja’Niyah] for 

marks on her body and in her vaginal region, apparent deteriorating mental health, and signs of being under the influence.” On April 8, the juvenile court granted the motion of the 

guardian ad litem and entered an ex parte order suspending 

visitation. On May 12, the court entered an order finding that 
- 307 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

“upon agreement of the parties, [Breyonna] shall be allowed 

to have visitation with [Jay’Oni, Ja’Niyah, and Jasmine] in the 

form of virtual visitation.” Visitation was set to occur once a 

week, with increased frequency “at the discretion of the case 

manager.” As of the first termination hearing, visitation had 

not increased beyond once a week, and visits continued to 

occur virtually.

On June 28, 2021, the State filed a motion for termination of Breyonna’s parental rights with respect to Jay’Oni and 

Jasmine only. The motion alleged that Jay’Oni and Jasmine 

came within the meaning of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-292(2), (6), 

and (7) (Reissue 2016). The motion did not identify any factual basis with respect to the allegations under § 43-292(2) and 

(7). With respect to the allegation under § 43-292(6), the State 

listed the court-ordered services that it believed Breyonna had 

not successfully completed, alleging that Breyonna had failed 

to do the following: (1) participate in parent-child interactive 

therapy; (2) obtain and maintain a stable and legal source of 

income; (3) maintain safe, appropriate, and adequate housing; (4) participate in trauma-focused therapy; (5) submit to 

urinalysis testing; (6) participate in “Level 2.1 [o]utpatient 

treatment”; (7) participate in supervised visitation; and (8) 

follow recommendations of the psychiatric evaluation. The 

State thus alleged that terminating Breyonna’s parental rights 

with respect to Jay’Oni and Jasmine was in the best interests 

of the children. Breyonna made her first appearance on the 

motion for termination on July 1, at which time she entered, 

and the court accepted, a plea of denial to the allegations in the 

motion. On July 6, the juvenile court entered an order largely 

reiterating the ordered services for Breyonna, except Breyonna 

was no longer ordered to participate in parent-child interactive therapy.

On September 22, 2021, the court held the first of two 

hearings on the motion for termination of Breyonna’s parental rights with respect to Jay’Oni and Jasmine. Wilson was 

the only witness to testify at the first termination hearing. At 
- 308 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

the start of the hearing, the court indicated that “[w]e are 

here for adjudication on the motion for termination of parental rights regarding Jay’Oni and Jasmine.” However, it was 

eventually revealed that the termination proceedings actually 

pertained to Jasmine alone, given that an appearance had been 

entered by Jay’Oni’s biological father.

With regard to the court order that Breyonna maintain 

adequate housing, Wilson testified that “Breyonna has consistently reported that she has had housing . . . . The biggest concern was the appropriateness of the housing.” Wilson 

testified that family support services was “assigned to assist 

Breyonna with different housing goals.” Wilson testified that 

Breyonna initially worked with her family support worker to 

address the safety and cleanliness of the home; however, at 

some point, “the goals shifted, as Breyonna . . . was under 

the impression that she wasn’t going to be able to stay in that 

apartment, in that residence much longer, and it started shifting 

towards applying for different housing services.” Wilson testified that when she asked to go inside Breyonna’s residence, 

Breyonna “often told [her] that the home is not appropriate 

and she doesn’t want me to come inside.” Wilson testified 

that Breyonna “seems to understand and acknowledge that she 

needs to address her housing situation.” However, Breyonna 

continued to reside in the same residence at the time of the termination hearings, and there was no indication that Breyonna 

had made progress toward establishing a home which was safe 

and suitable for the children.

With regard to the court order that Breyonna maintain 

a stable source of income, Wilson testified that Breyonna 

“reported on a couple different times that she has worked 

at different locations and was also trying to apply for disability.” Wilson testified that throughout the pendency of 

this case, Breanna worked at three different businesses. With 

respect to two of the businesses, there was no evidence as to 

the time period during which Breyonna was working at those 

locations. With respect to the third, Wilson testified only that 
- 309 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

Breyonna worked there for “a month or two.” According to 

Wilson, Breyonna reported that she was fired from the third 

business because “she had been late numerous times to work 

but that she also wore the wrong clothing for work.” With 

respect to disability, Wilson testified that Breyonna worked 

with her family support worker to complete an application, 

but “the next steps required from disability had not been completed and so Breyonna was needing to reapply.”

As mentioned above, Breyonna was ordered to participate 

in Level 2.1 outpatient treatment as recommended by the 

co-occurring evaluation completed in November 2020. Wilson 

testified Level 2.1 outpatient treatment is “for both group sessions and individual sessions a couple times a week, two to 

three times a week.” Wilson testified that Breyonna arranged 

to participate in treatment at the Douglas County Community 

Mental Health Center (CMHC), and her first appointment was 

sometime in April 2021. Wilson testified that Breyonna went to 

at least “a couple” additional appointments at CMHC and did 

not report any issues.

At some point, Wilson contacted CMHC and a “treatment provider” recommended to her that Breyonna complete 

an updated chemical dependency evaluation, “as there was 

concern that maybe the Level 2.1 outpatient [treatment] was 

not sufficient for Breyonna.” An updated chemical dependency evaluation recommended that Breyonna participate in 

residential treatment. Wilson testified that “Breyonna was not 

resistant to going” and that “[s]he was open to getting help 

through a residential treatment facility.” Breyonna arranged 

to participate in residential treatment at “Stephen Center” 

beginning on August 25, 2021. However, Wilson testified 

that Breyonna was unsuccessfully discharged from Stephen 

Center on September 6 because Breyonna “felt [a peer] had 

made a threat to her. . . . Breyonna had talked with staff at 

the Stephen Center [and] did not feel it was handled appropriately. Breyonna had made a statement that she could possibly 

burn the place down.”
- 310 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

After being discharged from Stephen Center, Breyonna 

arranged for residential treatment at “Family Works.” 

Breyonna was scheduled to begin treatment at Family Works 

on September 21, 2021, the day prior to the September 22 

hearing. However, Breyonna did not show up to Family Works 

as scheduled. Wilson testified that Breyonna would need to 

call Family Works to set up a new appointment, but it is 

unclear if that was ever done.

With regard to the court order that Breyonna participate in 

trauma-focused therapy, Wilson testified that such would have 

been completed “at the same time” as Breyonna’s chemical 

dependency treatment. Wilson testified that “we had already 

had the recommendation for her treatment for substance use 

and [trauma-focused] therapy would have and could have 

been completed during that time in both treatments.” This 

would seem to suggest that Breyonna was supposed to participate in trauma-focused therapy as part of her Level 2.1 

outpatient treatment at CMHC and then her residential treatment at Stephen Center and, prospectively, at Family Works. 

However, there was no mention of trauma-focused therapy in 

those contexts. Wilson ultimately testified that Breyonna did 

not participate in trauma-focused therapy, although Wilson testified that Breyonna appeared to understand the importance of 

both “chemical dependency and trauma-focused treatment” and 

“was willing to engage in those services.”

As mentioned above, Breyonna completed the court-ordered 

psychiatric evaluation in February 2021 and, according to 

Wilson, was recommended to “continue with medication management and to take the prescribed medication and return on a 

monthly basis.” Wilson testified that Breyonna was “willing to 

participate” with that recommendation; however, Wilson suggested that Breyonna was somewhat ambivalent about taking 

her medications and attending appointments. Wilson testified 

as follows:

Breyonna indicated at times that she was not taking her 

medication. There were times where she reported she 
- 311 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

would — she liked taking her medication. There were 

times she reported she didn’t like her medication and that 

she didn’t want to take it. That it made her feel different. 

And I had suggested she talk with her doctor and return to 

other appointments. Breyonna had reported that she had 

gone to some of those appointments but was not always 

consistent in taking her medication.

Wilson added, “I believe [Breyonna] has an appointment 

scheduled [in October], but I believe it has been at least a couple months before — since she has been to that appointment.” 

Wilson testified that she last spoke to staff at the psychiatrist’s 

office in August 2021, and they told Wilson that Breyonna 

“did not attend every appointment that was on a monthly basis 

but had attended some of them.” Wilson also testified that 

Breyonna reported she was taking her medication at Stephen 

Center but “had not been taking it once leaving.”

With regard to supervised visitation, Wilson testified that 

due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the initial visits were entirely 

virtual. Wilson testified that in-person visits began in “June 

or July of 2020.” Wilson testified that the initial virtual visits occurred “maybe three to five times a week,” and once 

in-person visits began, they were scheduled for “about three 

times a week.” Wilson testified that Breyonna’s visits were 

initially supervised through an agency called Apex, but that 

Breyonna was discharged in “June or July of 2020” due to her 

lack of participation in visits.

Wilson also testified that Breyonna was incarcerated on two 

different occasions during this case, and Wilson confirmed 

that Breyonna was not able to participate in any visits, virtual 

or otherwise, while incarcerated. Wilson testified Breyonna 

was initially incarcerated for “around a month” due to “an 

altercation with a person she had been in a relationship with.” 

Wilson’s testimony indicates that the first period of incarceration occurred sometime between July and August 2020. 

According to Wilson, Breyonna was incarcerated a second time 

for “just shy of two weeks” due to a violation of probation. 
- 312 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

Wilson testified that Breyonna was on probation for child 

abuse and neglect as a result of the incident that resulted in 

the children’s removal, and she was incarcerated for violating 

probation requirements such as complying with juvenile court 

orders, working toward reunification, and refraining from substances. It is unclear when the second period of incarceration 

occurred, although Wilson indicated elsewhere that Breyonna 

spent “some time in jail” around June or July 2021.

After Breyonna was discharged from visitations through 

Apex, Wilson testified that visits recommenced with an agency 

called Capstone after Breyonna was released from jail, which, 

despite the testimony above, Wilson indicated was not until 

November 2020. Wilson testified that the Capstone workers 

reported some difficult behaviors from Jasmine and Ja’Niyah 

during visits, adding that both Breyonna and the visitation 

workers had difficulty redirecting the children. Due to difficulties controlling all three children at the same time, Wilson 

testified that visits were split such that Breyonna visited with 

Jasmine and Jay’Oni at one time and with Ja’Niyah at another 

time. Wilson further testified that, at some point, Capstone 

communicated additional concerns “regarding consistency and 

just quality of the visits, conversations that were happening 

during visits.”

Wilson testified that Capstone continued to supervise visits 

at the time of the termination hearings, which, in accordance 

with the court’s May 12, 2021, order, were occurring once a 

week through a virtual platform. When asked about the purpose for the order limiting visits to one virtual visit a week, 

Wilson testified it was due to an incident in March 2021 in 

which Breyonna had “interrogated Jasmine regarding whether 

or not she was taking her own ADHD medication.” According 

to Wilson, “[t]he visitation worker had stated that she had tried 

to redirect this conversation but Breyonna continued and this 

brought Jasmine to tears, really struggling with why her mom 

did not believe her and why this was happening.” Wilson testified that she spoke to Breyonna about this incident and that 
- 313 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

Breyonna stated “she did ask Jasmine but Jasmine never cried 

and . . . she didn’t understand why that was an issue.”

A second motion to suspend visitation was filed on September 

30, 2021, and attached thereto was an affidavit in which the 

visitation worker attested that a September 17 virtual visit was 

cut short due to “the rapid decline” in the children’s moods. 

The visitation worker added that it was “very clear Breyonna 

. . . was on substances and unable to withstand any conversation with the youth.” The visitation worker further attested that 

a September 24 virtual visit was similarly cut short after “the 

good natured mood among the youth rapidly changed to chaos 

and crying.”

A significant amount of time at the first termination hearing, 

and nearly the entirety of the second termination hearing, was 

spent discussing court-ordered drug testing and Breyonna’s 

compliance therewith. Wilson testified that Breyonna was initially referred for drug testing with an agency called “Owens 

& Associates.” Wilson testified that Breyonna did not participate in “the majority” of her drug tests through Owens & 

Associates. According to Wilson, Breyonna reported “on multiple occasions that she was willing to test but she didn’t want 

to because she would be positive for marijuana.” Breyonna 

ultimately participated in only 4 out of 16 tests attempted from 

August 30 to November 4, 2020. In the first three completed 

tests, Breyonna tested “presumptive positive” for marijuana 

and negative for all other drugs. In the fourth completed test, 

Breyonna tested negative for all drugs. Breyonna was discharged from Owens & Associates on November 5, 2020, for 

missing 12 out of 16 attempted tests. Notably, Wilson testified 

that Breyonna was discharged in “August of 2020,” but the 

testimony of a supervisor from Owens & Associates and the 

related exhibit clearly refuted that testimony.

Wilson testified that Breyonna was subsequently referred 

for drug testing with Capstone and that such testing occurred 

in August 2020. However, a supervisor from Capstone testified that Breyonna began testing with it in November, which 
- 314 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

is consistent with her discharge from Owens & Associates. 

He testified that Breyonna was ultimately discharged in June 

2021 for lack of participation and that during those 6 months, 

Breyonna participated in only 3 of 85 attempted tests. However, 

the exhibit he prepared shows only the attempted tests from 

February through June 2021. This may be explained by the fact 

that Capstone briefly discharged Breyonna in January before 

“immediately” accepting the referral again that same month. 

Thus, it appears the supervisor from Capstone prepared only 

the records from the second period of testing, and during that 

period of time, there is only a record of one completed test 

which was negative for all substances.

While the actual results were not entered into evidence, the 

record nevertheless indicates that Breyonna tested positive 

for methamphetamine at least once during the first period of 

testing with Capstone. Wilson testified that she approached 

Breyonna about one of the November 2020 test results and 

that Breyonna reported “her neighbor may have laced her joint 

with methamphetamine.” Moreover, on December 2, the juvenile court ordered that “Saint Francis Ministries shall ascertain 

from [Breyonna’s] chemical dependency evaluator whether or 

not a higher level of care is warranted, given her recent positive test for methamphetamine.”

After being discharged from Capstone in June 2021, 

Breyonna was referred again to Owens & Associates. Breyonna 

was eventually discharged from Owens & Associates in August, 

due to her entering residential treatment at Stephen Center. In 

those 2 months with Owens & Associates, Breyonna completed 7 of 12 attempted tests. In the first six completed tests, 

Breyonna tested negative for all drugs. In the seventh completed test, Breyonna tested “presumptive positive” for methamphetamine and negative for all other drugs.

Regarding Jasmine’s progress during the case, Wilson testified that Jasmine was diagnosed with “ADHD,” and when 

Wilson first met her, Jasmine “was very hyperactive. She 

was very difficult to have a conversation with. She could 
- 315 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

not sit still. She was very disrespectful towards her greatgrandmother, . . . her foster parent.” Wilson also pointed out 

that Jasmine was “very rough with her younger sisters” and 

that she “appeared as if she had a lot of responsibility and 

knew a lot that kids her age are typically not responsible 

for.” Wilson saw Jasmine on a monthly basis, and when she 

last saw Jasmine in September 2021, she noticed “significant 

improvements, even in school, being able to identify letters 

and read on her own. She is excited about school. She is able 

to sit down and actually be very calm and have a conversation.” Wilson said that Jasmine “really made a lot of progress 

in being able to understand and verbalize things that she wants 

and that she needs.” Further, Jasmine was “much more ageappropriate with her siblings at this time.”

Wilson ultimately testified to her opinion that it would be 

in Jasmine’s best interests for Breyonna’s parental rights to 

be terminated. As to the basis of that opinion, Wilson testified 

as follows:

Throughout my time working with Breyonna and Jasmine, 

Breyonna has not shown an ability to be consistent or 

meet the needs of Jasmine. She has not made significant 

progress in this case to address her own mental health 

and substance use needs to put herself in a position to 

parent her child. I have seen Jasmine make such huge 

progress in the time that she has been able to be in foster 

care and be in a position where she is getting not only 

some stability and consistency but the ability to not have 

to parent her younger siblings and to be a kid and focus 

on her school and the things that she wants to do and 

enjoys to do.

With regard to Jasmine’s input, Wilson testified that “[s]he 

says she loves her mom, she misses her mom, she’s very worried about her mom, and wants her mom to get help.”

After adducing the urinalysis-related testimony of the 

supervisor from Owens & Associates and the supervisor from 

Capstone at the second termination hearing, the State rested 
- 316 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

and submitted the matter on the evidence without argument. 

The guardian ad litem for the children did not adduce any evidence or provide any argument. The defense provided a brief 

argument, emphasizing Breyonna’s cooperation and engagement with services and asserting that the State failed to meet 

its burden to terminate parental rights.

On November 15, 2021, the juvenile court entered an order 

terminating Breyonna’s parental rights with respect to Jasmine 

only. The court found that the State had proved, by clear and 

convincing evidence, statutory bases for termination under 

§ 43-292(2), (6), and (7) and that termination of Breyonna’s 

parental rights was in the best interests of Jasmine. With regard 

to the allegations under § 43-292(6), the court found that each 

was true by clear and convincing evidence, except the court 

dismissed allegations (1) and (6) above. The court thus terminated Breyonna’s parental rights with respect to Jasmine, and 

Breyonna brought this appeal.

ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

Breyonna assigns that the juvenile court erred in terminating 

her parental rights because the State failed to prove by clear 

and convincing evidence that Jasmine was within the meaning of § 43-292(2), (6), and (7) and because the State failed to 

prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination was in 

the best interests of Jasmine.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

[1] An appellate court reviews juvenile cases de novo on 

the record and reaches its conclusions independently of the 

findings made by the juvenile court below. In re Interest 

of Mateo L. et al., 309 Neb. 565, 961 N.W.2d 516 (2021). 

However, when the evidence is in conflict, an appellate court 

may consider and give weight to the fact that the juvenile court 

observed the witnesses and accepted one version of the facts 

over another. Id.
- 317 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

ANALYSIS

[2,3] Under Nebraska law, terminating parental rights 

requires both clear and convincing evidence that one of the 

statutory grounds enumerated in § 43-292 exists and clear and 

convincing evidence that termination is in the best interests 

of the children. See In re Interest of Donald B. & Devin B., 

304 Neb. 239, 933 N.W.2d 864 (2019). Clear and convincing evidence means and is that amount of evidence which 

produces in the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction about 

the existences of a fact to be proven. In re Interest of Kindra 

S., 14 Neb. App. 202, 705 N.W.2d 792 (2005). Further, clear 

and convincing evidence is more than a preponderance of evidence, but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

Statutory Grounds for Termination.

[4,5] The State alleged a number of statutory grounds for termination, including § 43-292(7), which allows for termination 

when “[t]he juvenile has been in an out-of-home placement for 

fifteen or more of the most recent twenty-two months.” Section 

43-292(7) operates mechanically and does not require the State 

to adduce evidence of any specific fault on the part of the parent. See In re Interest of Mateo L. et al., supra. Any one of the 

bases for termination codified by § 43-292 can serve as a basis 

for termination of parental rights when coupled with evidence 

that termination is in the best interests of the children. In re 

Interest of Leyton C. & Landyn C., 307 Neb. 529, 949 N.W.2d 

773 (2020).

In this case, the juvenile court found that Jasmine came 

within the meaning of § 43-292(7). Based on our de novo 

review of the record, we also find clear and convincing evidence that Jasmine came within the meaning of § 43-292(7). 

Jasmine was removed from Breyonna’s care and custody in 

March 2020 and never returned. On appeal, Breyonna concedes that Jasmine has been in foster care beyond the statutory 

timeframe set forth in § 43-292(7). Thus, there is no doubt 

that Jasmine came within the meaning of § 43-292(7), and 
- 318 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

Breyonna’s assignment of error regarding statutory grounds 

for termination is without merit.

Best Interests.

Based on our de novo review of the record, we conclude 

the juvenile court did not err in finding clear and convincing evidence that termination of Breyonna’s parental rights 

was in Jasmine’s best interests. We arrive at this conclusion 

because the evidence regarding Breyonna’s continued drug 

use, lack of income, lack of suitable housing, and overall lack 

of progress toward reunification raises serious concerns about 

Breyonna’s parental fitness and her ability to rehabilitate herself within a reasonable period of time. Additionally, Jasmine 

had made “significant improvements” since being removed 

from Breyonna’s care. Where Jasmine had been “hyperactive,” 

difficult to converse with, unable to sit still, and “very rough 

with her younger sisters” when she was initially removed from 

Breyonna’s care, Jasmine had improved in foster care to being 

able to understand and verbalize things better, she could sit 

down and calmly have a conversation, and she was “much 

more age-appropriate with her siblings.”

[6-8] When a parent is unable or unwilling to rehabilitate 

himself or herself within a reasonable period of time, the 

child’s best interests require termination of parental rights. In 

re Interest of Leyton C. & Landyn C., supra. The 15-month 

condition contained in § 43-292(7) provides a reasonable timetable for parents to rehabilitate themselves. In re Interest of 

Leyton C. & Landyn C., supra. Furthermore, children cannot, 

and should not, be suspended in foster care or be made to await 

uncertain parental maturity. In re Interest of Alec S., 294 Neb. 

784, 884 N.W.2d 701 (2016).

After 18 months of court-supervised rehabilitation efforts, 

Breyonna has failed to make meaningful progress toward putting herself in a position to parent her children. Breyonna 

failed to participate in the vast majority of court-ordered 

drug testing, and of the tests that were completed, many were 
- 319 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

positive for substances. Breyonna apparently held three different jobs during the 18 months of proceedings, yet she failed 

to maintain any of those positions for an extended period of 

time. Despite the condition of Breyonna’s residence being the 

primary basis for the children’s removal, Breyonna remained 

in that residence at the time of the termination hearings, and 

despite the efforts of family support services, there was no 

indication that the condition of the residence had improved. 

Breyonna never progressed beyond supervised visitation with 

the children, and visitation workers repeatedly expressed concerns about Breyonna’s behavior during visits and the negative 

impact that such behavior had on the children. Breyonna’s conduct during visitation ultimately resulted in her being limited to 

one virtual visit per week. Altogether, the record demonstrates 

clear and convincing evidence of present parental unfitness, 

and despite ample opportunity, Breyonna failed to take meaningful steps toward rehabilitating herself. Thus, we affirm the 

order of the juvenile court terminating Breyonna’s parental 

rights as to Jasmine.

As a cautionary note, we point out that the record in this 

case is lacking evidence that would have been helpful to our 

de novo review of Jasmine’s best interests. Aside from a single 

affidavit discussing two virtual visits, the record is devoid of 

evidence adduced directly from individuals who were actually present for visits between Breyonna and the children. 

Wilson testified that she had never been present at any of the 

visits, and her testimony was limited to reiterating generalized concerns reported to her from visitation workers. Our 

ability to assess the nature of visits is further impacted by the 

absence of any documentary evidence such as periodic court 

reports or notes from visitation workers. As such, we are reliant on Wilson’s recollection of those reports to conduct our de 

novo review.

Moreover, while Wilson suggested that Breyonna was not 

adequately addressing her psychiatric needs, the record is 

inexplicably devoid of any evidence regarding Breyonna’s 
- 320 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

psychiatric diagnoses, prescription medications, or treatment 

goals. At oral argument, the State indicated that this was 

because Breyonna failed to sign releases of information such 

that Wilson was not able to obtain this information. However, 

the record refutes that claim. Wilson specifically testified to 

speaking directly with Breyonna’s psychiatrist and getting 

periodic updates on Breyonna’s “compliance with appointments.” Wilson further testified that she never had an issue 

with Breyonna’s declining to sign a release of information in 

this case.

Perhaps most importantly, there was no testimony or other 

evidence regarding the impact that terminating Breyonna’s 

parental rights may or may not have on Jasmine, especially 

considering the fact that Breyonna’s parental rights remained 

intact with respect to Jasmine’s younger sisters who were both 

placed with Jasmine in the same foster home. The State failed 

to adduce evidence directly from many of the people most 

able to testify as to Jasmine’s present condition and future 

well-being. See In re Interest of Aaron D., 269 Neb. 249, 691 

N.W.2d 164 (2005) (observing that State failed to present testimony or other evidence from therapists, family support workers, foster parents, and others who directly observed parties).

Rather, the State relied primarily on a single caseworker who 

testified that she saw Jasmine only once a month.

As the present case illustrates, evidence that a parent is 

presently unfit, when coupled with a demonstrated inability 

or unwillingness to rehabilitate oneself within a reasonable 

period of time, can supply the information necessary to determine the best interests of the child. However, it must not be 

forgotten that the focus of a termination proceeding is the 

juvenile, not the parent. See id. Thus, evidence of parental 

deficiencies should not be adduced to the exclusion of additional evidence relevant to the present condition and future 

well-being of the child.

In In re Interest of Alec S., 294 Neb. 784, 884 N.W.2d 701 

(2016), the Nebraska Supreme Court was presented with a 
- 321 -

Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets

31 Nebraska Appellate Reports

IN RE INTEREST OF JAY’ONI W. ET AL.

Cite as 31 Neb. App. 302

record that was similarly lacking certain evidence relevant to 

the best interests analysis. In that case, the court observed that 

while filling in the gaps could have aided appellate review, 

the lack of all the “‘gory details’” does not necessarily mean 

the State failed to meet its burden of proof. Id. at 795, 884 

N.W.2d at 708. Likewise, in this case, we conclude that the 

State satisfied its burden of proof despite failing to adduce 

evidence that could have aided our de novo review.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the order of the juvenile court terminating Breyonna’s parental rights to Jasmine.

Affirmed.