Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: J.G., J.G.
Respondent-Mother appeals from the trial court's 26 September 2023 order terminating her parental rights to her two children, J.G. and J.G. See N.C. R. App. P. 42(b) (pseudonyms used to protect the identity of minors). Counsel for Mother filed a no-merit brief under Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. N.C. R. App. P. 3.1(e). Mother did not exercise her opportunity to file a pro se brief in accordance with Rule 3.1(e).
Counsel filing a Rule 3.1(e) no-merit brief is required to “identify any issues in the record on appeal that arguably support the appeal and must state why those issues lack merit or would not alter the ultimate result.” Id.
Counsel fully complied with all of the requirements of Rule 3.1(e) and identified three potential issues for our independent review: (1) whether the trial court abused its discretion by failing to appoint Respondent-Mother a Rule 17 Guardian Ad Litem until before the Termination of Parental Rights Hearing; (2) whether the trial court reversibly erred by concluding grounds existed to terminate Respondent-Mother's parental rights because the evidence failed to support the findings and the findings failed to support the conclusions; and, (3) whether the trial court abused its discretion by terminating parental rights because termination was not in the best interests of the juveniles.
In accordance with In re L.E.M., we have conducted an independent review of the potential issues raised in the no-merit brief. In re L.E.M., 372 N.C. 396, 402, 831 S.E.2d 341, 345 (2019) (“We conclude that the text of Rule 3.1([e]) plainly contemplates appellate review of the issues contained in a no-merit brief.”). “[W]e are satisfied that the trial court's order terminating respondent's parental rights is supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and is based on proper legal grounds.” In re K.M.S., 380 N.C. 56, 59, 867 S.E.2d 868, 870 (2022).
We affirm the trial court's order terminating Respondent-Mother's parental rights. Id. It is so ordered.
AFFIRMED.
Report per Rule 30(e).
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. COA23-1163
Decided: June 18, 2024
Court: Court of Appeals of North Carolina.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)