Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Hartford, Hartford, Juvenile Matters
IN RE: LYRIQ R., a child under the age of eighteen years [*]
CORRECTED MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
[1]
GILLIGAN, JTR
By
petition filed with this court on December 27, 2017, the
Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families
("DCF") seeks to terminate the parental rights of
Dha lia R. ("Mother") and Duval M.
("Father") as those rights pertain to the minor
child, Lyriq R., born February 3, 2017.
The
respondent Mother and Father were served with the petition by
a State Marshal, appeared and were appointed counsel. The
court finds that the respondents were properly served and
that notice of the proceedings was properly given in
accordance with the applicable provisions of the Connecticut
General Statutes and the Practice Book. There is no known
action pending in any other court concerning custody of the
minor child nor any claim of Native American affiliation.
Accordingly, the court finds that it has jurisdiction over
this matter.
On
December 5, 2017, the court entered judgment adjudicating
Father's paternity of the child. (Dannehy, J.)
On September 5, 2017, Lyriq was adjudicated neglected and
committed to DCF. (Dannehy, J.) On January 2, 2018,
the court approved a permanency plan of termination of
parental rights and adoption. (Dannehy, J.)
A trial
on the petition was conducted on May 15, 2018. Mother and
Father were present and represented by court appointed
counsel. At the commencement of the trial, the court provided
Mother and Father with an advisement of their rights
including her right to remain silent and the possibility that
the court may draw an adverse inference from her failure to
testify pursuant to In re Yasiel, 317 Conn. 773
(2015).
Reasonable
Efforts to Locate
A
termination of parental rights under General Statutes Section
17a-112(j) on non-consensual grounds requires the court to
find, by clear and convincing evidence, that DCF has made
reasonable efforts to locate the respondent parents.
No
claims or issues concerning DCF's efforts to locate
Mother or Father were raised. Mother and Father we're
properly served with the order of temporary custody, the
neglect petition and the termination of parental rights
petition, appeared personally and were appointed counsel. The
court finds by clear and convincing evidence that DCF made
reasonable efforts to locate Mother and Father.
Adjudication
of Father's Rights (Consent).
With
his counsel present, Father executed and tendered a written
consent to the termination of his parental rights to Lyriq.
Father was canvassed by the court on his understanding of the
legal consequences of his consent and following a finding
that the consent was knowingly and voluntarily made with the
effective assistance of counsel, Father's consent was
accepted and entered by the court. DCF's oral motion to
amend the grounds in the petition to Father's consent was
granted.
Adjudication
of Mother's Parental Rights
In the
termination of parental rights petition filed December 27,
2017, DCF alleges that the child has been found in a prior
proceeding to have been neglected or uncared for and Mother
has failed to achieve the degree of personal rehabilitation
that would encourage the belief that within a reasonable
time, considering the age and needs of the child, Mother
could assume a responsible position in the life of the child,
General Statute § 17a-112 (j) (3) (B) (I).
The
Evidence
The
court heard testimony from DCF social worker, Beatrice
Velasquez, psychologist Bruce Freedman, PhD., a family
support specialist with The Village for Families and
Children, Lisa Rochester, parole officer Brian Norton, a case
manager from the Chryallis Center, Shacara Hite, a licensed
clinical social worker with St. Francis Behavioral Health,
Jessica Clancy, a licensed clinical social worker with First
Choice Health Center, Ephraim Diaz and Mother. DCF offered
exhibits (Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N,
O, and P.) which were admitted as full exhibits without
objection. No exhibits were offered by Mother or the attorney
for the minor child.
Counsel
for DCF moved for the court to take judicial notice of the
court's prior proceedings and records. "There is no
question that the trial court may take judicial notice of the
file in another case, whether or not the other case is
between the same parties." Drabik v. East Lyme,
234 Conn. 390, 398 (1995). A court may take judicial notice
of the court's records for their existence, content and
legal effect. State v. Gaines, 257 Conn. 695, 705
n.7 (2001), Grant v. Commissioner of Corrections, 87
Conn.App. 814, 817 (2005). See Tait & Prescott,
Tait's Handbook of Connecticut Evidence §§
2.3.4 (d) (5th ed. 2014). The court granted the motion,
absent objection, and took judicial notice of the petitions
and pleadings and their filing dates, court memoranda and
transcripts of hearings, prior court rulings, findings,
orders and judgments in the court files.
The
court was able to closely observe the appearance and demeanor
of the respondent and the witnesses and determine the
validity, cohesion, and credibility of the testimony. The
court has reviewed and ...