DA 07
- 0525 

### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2008 MT 30N
IN THE MATTER OF DECLARING D.C., A Youth in Need of Care
.
APPEAL FROM: Di strict Court of the Fourth Judicial District,

In and For the County

of Missoula, Cause No. DN 20 06
- 0 28 Honorable Ed McLean, Presiding Judge COUNSEL OF RECORD:

For Appellant: Jim Wheelis, Chief Appellate Defender, Roberta R. Zenker , Assistant Appellate Defender, Helena, M ontana For Appellee : The Hon. Mi

ke McGrath, Montana Attorney General , Jonathan M. Krauss, Assistant Attorney

General , Helena, Montana Fred R. Van Valkenburg, Missoula County A ttorney, Leslie Halligan, Deputy Count y Attorney, Missoula, Montana

Submitted on Briefs: January 23, 2008 Decided: February

5, 2008 Filed:

__________________________________________ Clerk February 5 20082

Justice James C. Nelson delivered the Opinion of the Court. ¶1 Pursuant to Section I , Paragraph 3(d)(v), Montana Supreme Court 1996 Internal Operating Rules, as amended in 2003, the following me morandum deci sion shall not be cited as precedent. It shall be filed as a public document with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and i ts case title, Supreme Court cause number and disposition shall be included in this C ourt’s quarterly list o f noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana Reports. ¶2 A .D., the mother of D.C., appeals from the District Court’s September 10, 2007 order terminating her parental rights and granting the Department of Public Health and Human Services, Division of Child and Family Services (the Department) permanent legal custody with the right to consent to adoption. A.D. raises two issues on appeal: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the findings of fact for termination of [her] parental rights; and (2) whether [ her] treatment plan was appropriate in that it faile d to take into consideration [her] particular problems
. ¶3 D.C. was born in April 2006 to A.D. and W.C. The day after her birth , D .C. was placed in emergency protective custodyf or a number of reasons including: h er parents’ illegal drug use, including A.D.’s u se of methamphetamine swhile D.C. was in ut ero; W.C.’s criminal behavior and arrest s ; A.D.’s minimal prenatal care; an unstable home environment; the prior adjudication and placement in protective cus tody of D.C.’s half
sister, K.D ., and K.D.’s adjudication as a youth in need of care ; and A.D.’s rejection of and failure to participate in services offered toh er for her benefit and the benefit of the children
.3

¶4 In due course, the Department was granted temporary legal custody , and D.C. was adjudicated ayouth in need of care. The court approved an appropriate treatment plan for A.D. The court found that this plan identified the problems and conditions that resulted in the abuse or neglect of the child , and provided treatment goals and objectives, a projected time period , and specific treatment objectives to identify the separate roles and responsibilities of the parties. ¶5 However, o n July 13, 2007 , theD epartment filed a petition to terminate A.D.’ s parental rights and to award the Department permanent legal custody with the right to consent to adoption. F ollowing a termination hearing at whichA .D. was represented by counsel and at whiche vidence was provided in support of the petition, the District C ourt issued extensive findings o f fact and conclusions of law terminating A .D.’s parental rights and

granting permanent legal custody with the right to consent to adoptionto the Department. 1 ¶6 A.D. argues on appeal that her treatment plan was not appropriat e becauseit failed to take into consideration her psychological deficits , some of which resulted from her beingraised by the Department for a significant part of her adolescence. A .D. also argu es that her mental health records s hould have been taken into consideration by her examining psychologist and the court. S he contends that many of her difficulties were not addressed by thetreatment plan, therefore , thetreatment planw as not appropriate. A.D. argues that the Department did not present substanti al evidence at the termination

1 Atthe hearing, the District Court also accepted the relinquishment of p arental r ights of the father, W.C.4

hearing to prove by clear and convincing evidence that she was an unfit parent. S he contends that, on balance, she is a good parent. ¶7 To the contrary, the State argues that the District C ourt made the correct statutory findings and conclusions of law based on overwhelming evidence in the record. The State further argues that the c ourt properly exercised its discretion in ordering termination of A.D.’s parental rights and that the treatment plan was appropriate. ¶8 We review a di strict court’s decision to terminate parental rights to determine whether the district court abused its discretion. In re D.B. , 2007 MT 246, ¶ 16, 339 Mont. 240, ¶ 16, 168 P.3d 691, ¶ 16. Havingreviewed the record on appeal and havin g considered the parties’ briefs and arguments, we conclude that the requirements of § 41
- 3
- 609(1)(f), MCA, have been satisfied in this case

—D.C. was adjudicated a youth in need of care; an appropriate , c ourt - approved treatment plan was provided to A.D.; this treatment plan w asnot complied with or was not successful ly completed ; and the conduct
or condition rendering A.D. unfit is unlikely to change within a reasonable period of time. ¶9 W e have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph3 (d) of
our 1996 int ernal operating rules, as amended in 2003, which provides for memorandum opinions. It i s manifest on the face of the briefs and o nthe record before us that the appeal is without merit because the court’s findings of fact are su pported by clear and convin cing

e vidence , and because the legal issues are clearly controlled by settled Montana law which the District Court correctly interpreted. Therefore , w e hold that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in terminating A.D.’s parental rights.5

¶10 Affirmed.
/S/ JAMES C. NELSON
We Concur: /S/ KARLA M. GRAY /S/ PATRICIA COTTER /S/ W. WILLIAM LEAPHART /S/ BRIAN MORRIS