Follow Us

Facebooktwitter
≡ Menu

10. Sufficiency of

Rusk County DHHS v. R.S., 2022AP1530, District 3, 1/20/23 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity R.S. (“Ruth”) argues that at the trial on the County’s petition to terminate her parental rights, the County Department of Health and Human Services didn’t prove it made reasonable efforts to provide the services ordered in the original CHIPS… Read more

{ 0 comments }

TPR order affirmed

State v. J.W., 2022AP1338, District 1, 10/4/22 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity J.W.’s challenges the sufficiency of the evidence at both the grounds and dispositional phases of the proceeding that terminated his parental rights to J.W., Jr. The court of appeals rejects his arguments. The TPR petition alleged continuing CHIPS under § 48.415(2)… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. D.T., 2022AP909, 8/23/22, District 1 (oen-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity D.T. showed up late for his Zoom TPR trial. It had been set for 9:00; D.T. appeared at 11:00 and said he was having eye trouble that kept him from logging in. The circuit court defaulted him and declined to vacate… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. L.T.H., 2022AP56 & 2022AP57, District 1, 7/19/22 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity L.T.H. challenges the circuit court’s refusal to terminate her grounds trial from that of the father of one of her children, its decision to allow evidence of her own experience with the child welfare system when she was a… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. M.B., 2022AP89, District 1, 7/19/22 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity M.B. entered a no contest plea to failing to assume parental responsibility and to her daughter being in continuing need of protection or services. During the plea colloquy, the circuit court suggested she had the “same trial rights” at the dispositional… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Douglas County DHHS v. J.S., 2021AP1123, District 3, 12/29/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity The court of appeals rejects J.S.’s claim that the County didn’t prove it made a reasonable effort to provide her with the services she was ordered in the CHIPS proceeding to use as a condition for returning her child… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Challenges to TPR rejected

State v. T.T., 2021AP739, 2021AP740, 2021AP741 & 2021AP742, District 1, 7/23/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity T.T. unsuccessfully challenges the findings at the grounds phase and the dispositional order terminating his parental rights to his four children. At the grounds phase, the circuit court found that the state had proved both continuing CHIPS… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. A.C.M., 2018AP2423-2424, 11/12/19, District 1 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity A.C.M.’s trial lawyer did not call her psychiatrist to testify about her mental health or her medication compliance–evidence that was important to the issue of whether she posed a safety risk to her children. The court of appeals held that even… Read more

{ 0 comments }