Case Name: In the Interest of: L.L. and R.D., Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. L.L. (Father), Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2009-04-07
Citations: 282 S.W.3d 398
Docket Number: No. WD 70225
Parties: In the Interest of: L.L. and R.D., Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. L.L. (Father), Appellant.
Judges: Before LISA WHITE HARDWICK, P.J., HAROLD L. LOWENSTEIN, Judge and VICTOR C. HOWARD, Judge.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 282
Pages: 398–398

Head Matter:
In the Interest of: L.L. and R.D., Juvenile Officer, Respondent, v. L.L. (Father), Appellant.
No. WD 70225.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
April 7, 2009.
Kathleen Winger, Harrisonville, MO, for Respondent.
John A. Lozano, Harrisonville, MO, for Appellant.
Before LISA WHITE HARDWICK, P.J., HAROLD L. LOWENSTEIN, Judge and VICTOR C. HOWARD, Judge.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM:
L.L. appeals the judgment of the trial court terminating his parental rights to his children, R.D. and L.L. On appeal, he claims that the trial court erred in terminating his parental rights because the Juvenile Officer did not present clear, cogent, and convincing evidence to support termination upon any statutory ground. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.
The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).