Opinion ID: 2284287
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Propriety of Combining Termination Proceeding and Adoption Proceedings

Text: Mother asserts that combining the TPR hearing and the adoption hearing into the same proceeding improperly injected evidence relevant to the adoption into the TPR hearing. TPR hearings under chapter 211 and adoption hearings under chapter 453 can proceed simultaneously before the same judge. See State ex rel. Womack v. Rolf, 173 S.W.3d 634, 639 (Mo. banc 2005); see also Blackburn v. Mackey, 131 S.W.3d 392, 396-98 (Mo.App.2004). The quality of the adoptive home is not a part of the termination inquiry; rather, the focus is on the natural parent's interactions and relationship with the child. See section 211.447; section 453.040(7). The issue of termination must be considered first in contested chapter 453 adoptions to avoid confusing the quality of the adoptive home with the grounds for terminating parental rights. In re M.O., 70 S.W.3d 579, 588 (Mo.App.2002). The trial court is presumed to know the law. Lane v. Lensmeyer, 158 S.W.3d 218, 224 (Mo. banc 2005). Moreover, [t]he presumption is that the court, in weighing the evidence, was governed by correct rules of law. Linders v. Linders, 356 Mo. 852, 204 S.W.2d 229, 234 (1947); see also Hodel v. Dir. of Revenue, 61 S.W.3d 274, 280 (Mo.App.2001) (stating that appellate courts presume the trial court will sort out the incompetent and irrelevant and base its decision upon the competent and relevant evidence.). In this case, this Court presumes that the trial court considered and applied the evidence appropriately in first adjudicating termination of parental rights and then the adoption and will do so again on remand.