AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves the termination of parental rights of Timothy W. (Father) to his children. The district court found that the children were neglected, a fact to which Father stipulated during the adjudicatory hearing.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (Children, Youth & Families Department): [Not applicable or not found]
• Respondent-Appellant (Timothy W.): Argued that the Court of Appeals incorrectly implied in its notice of proposed disposition that he stipulated to facts supporting abuse, when he had only stipulated that the children were neglected.

Legal Issues

• Whether the Court of Appeals improperly misconstrued facts by stating that Father stipulated to facts in support of abuse when he had only stipulated that the children were neglected.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s termination of Father’s parental rights.

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, led by Chief Judge J. Miles Hanisee, with Judges Jacqueline R. Medina and Briana H. Zamora concurring, found Father's argument unconvincing. The Court clarified that the notice of proposed disposition accurately reflected that Father stipulated at the adjudicatory hearing that the children were neglected, which was a finding by the district court, and not that he stipulated to facts supporting abuse. The Court also noted that Father raised no new facts, authority, or arguments in his memorandum in opposition that would persuade the Court that the notice of proposed disposition was incorrect. Therefore, the Court affirmed the district court’s decision to terminate Father’s parental rights (paras 1-3).