D.A. (“David”) raises various challenges to the finding his three children are in need of protection or services and to the dispositional orders. The court of appeals rejects his claims.
The arguments and issues are very fact specific, so we give only a brief overview here. David’s claims and the court’s disposition are as follows:
- The evidence was sufficient to find the children were in need of protection or services for neglect, § 48.13(10), substantial risk of neglect, § 48.13(10m), and emotional damage, § 48.13(11). (¶¶6-11, 22-38).
- The circuit court properly exercised its discretion in placing the children with their mother (who was a co-defendant in the CHIPS proceeding) and allowing visitation at the discretion of the County’s Department of Health and Human Services. (¶¶39-48).
- The circuit court didn’t display the appearance of bias in favor of the County (¶¶49-51) or deprive David of procedural due process by limiting his ability to impeach the County’s witnesses (¶¶52-58).