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 Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) took custody of two children due to allegations of an unsanitary home, drug use by the father and the children's stepmother, and abandonment by the stepmother. The children were initially placed in nonrelative foster care, joined by their biological mother as an interested party, and temporarily placed with her in California before her death, after which they returned to foster care in New Mexico. The father relocated to California shortly after the case began (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (CYFD): Argued that the father neglected the children as defined by law, failed to engage minimally in his case plan, and that the conditions causing neglect were unlikely to change in the foreseeable future despite CYFD's reasonable efforts to assist the father (paras 7, 22-23, 29-30).
• Respondent-Appellant (Father): Contended that CYFD did not make reasonable efforts to assist him in adjusting the conditions that rendered him unable to properly care for the children, particularly by not providing specific contact information or direction to services in California, and argued that he was not given sufficient time to work the case plan (paras 19, 28).

Legal Issues

• Whether the judgment terminating the father's parental rights is a final and appealable order (para 1).
• Whether CYFD made reasonable efforts to assist the father in adjusting the conditions that rendered him unable to properly care for the children (para 19).

Disposition

• The court held that the judgment terminating the father's parental rights is a final and appealable order (para 14).
• The court affirmed the termination of the father's parental rights, finding that CYFD made reasonable efforts to assist the father (para 32).

Reasons

• MEDINA, Judge, HANISEE, Judge, and YOHALEM, Judge, concurring: The court determined that the judgment was final and appealable, emphasizing the legislative mandate to hear such appeals at the earliest practical time and considering the interests of the child as paramount. It found that the remaining proceedings involving other children and parents did not affect the finality of the order concerning the father and his children. On the merits, the court found clear and convincing evidence that CYFD made reasonable efforts to assist the father, including referrals to local services in California, virtual meetings, and attempts to engage the father in his treatment plan. The father's lack of engagement and failure to make meaningful attempts to work his treatment plan supported the decision to terminate his parental rights (paras 10-31).