Court Opinion

ID: 9520667
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:46:41.619201+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:46:35.690485
License: Public Domain

BAKER, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur with the majority opinion except for its conclusion with respect to the trial court's imposition on Mother of 80 hours of community service and payment of 80% of the guardian ad litem's fees. The majority accepts the trial court's imposition of the seven-day sentence and 180 hours of community service, but finds fault with the imposition of an additional 80 hours of community service and payment of 80% of the guardian ad litem's fees. I do not believe that there is a basis for drawing this lTine-that the trial court separated the punishment into two segments is of no moment inasmuch as an initial imposition of 260 hours of community service would have been acceptable.
The majority finds fault with the additional punishment because it concludes that Mother could not have avoided this punishment through obedience. I respectfully disagree with this conclusion. If Mother had initially obeyed the trial court's order requiring her to enter into, facilitate, and cooperate with counseling with Father and the children, then her suspended thirty-day sentence would have remained suspended. Rather than complying with the order, however, Mother continued to thwart and undermine repeated attempts by Dr. Lennon to repair the relationship between Father and the children. It is Mother's lack of obedience that led directly to the punishment at issue, and I see no reason why we should treat the trial court's imposition of a seven-day sentence and 180 hours of community service any differently from its imposition of 80 hours of community service *1036and payment of the guardian ad litem's fees.