Opinion ID: 6345004
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Custody Trial And 2015 Custody Order

Text: In December 2013, when the child was six months old and Poole was still incarcerated, Rainer filed a complaint seeking sole legal and primary physical custody. Poole filed an answer and counterclaim the following month requesting joint legal and physical custody and visitation every weekend until he was out of prison. While no custody order was in place, Poole asserted on several occasions that Rainer did not facilitate sufficient visitation with the child following the end of their relationship. A custody trial took place in February 2015. The court found both parties on equal footing with regard to most of the statutory best interests factors.2 On the willingness of each parent to allow a close and continuing relationship between the child and the other parent, the court found that Poole was “doing pretty well and trying to make things work” and that Rainer “could do a better job.” The court ruled that Rainer should have primary physical custody but that Poole’s time with the child should be increased. It issued a custody order in March 2015 awarding joint legal custody and primary physical custody to Rainer while Poole lived 1 Rainer testified that Poole had been incarcerated from March 2012 to October 2014, but testimony was otherwise consistent that Poole was incarcerated for 19 months. 2 See AS 25.24.150(c) (providing factors court is to consider in determining a child’s best interests in custody proceedings). -2- 7597 outside of Anchorage. Poole was given unsupervised visitation that gradually increased from six hours per week to one week per month. In September 2016, when the child was likely to begin preschool, Poole’s visits were to decrease to two consecutive overnights every other week.