Opinion

Lint v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.

  • 2014 Ark. App. 280
Court
Court of Appeals of Arkansas
Filed
May 7, 2014
Status
Published
On the bench
Bill H. Walmsley
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 31.6%

The opinion

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 280

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION I

No. CV-13-1075

Opinion Delivered May 7, 2014

KEVIN LINT

APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE WASHINGTON

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

V. [NO. J2010-229-3]

ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HONORABLE STACEY

HUMAN SERVICES ZIMMERMAN, JUDGE

APPELLEE

AFFIRMED; MOTION TO

WITHDRAW GRANTED

BILL H. WALMSLEY, Judge

Appellant Kevin Lint appeals the termination of his parental rights to his son, B.L., and

his daughter, J.L. Pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark.

131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-9(i) (2013), Lint’s counsel

has filed a no-merit brief and a motion to withdraw, alleging that there are no meritorious

grounds for appeal. Lint was given an opportunity to file pro se points for reversal but

declined to do so. We affirm the termination and grant the motion to withdraw.

The children were removed from Lint’s custody in December 2012 after an

investigation revealed that the children were living in unsanitary conditions, that B.L. was

being physically abused by an older stepbrother, and that J.L. was being sexually abused by

another older stepbrother. Prior to this removal, there had been multiple findings of

inadequate supervision since 2007 with Lint and the children’s mother as the offenders. Lint

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 280

had received services in a protective-services case and again when the children were removed

from their mother’s custody in March 2010.

After the children were removed from Lint in December 2012, the trial court

adjudicated the children dependent-neglected in February 2013. The court found by a

preponderance of the evidence that J.L. had been sexually abused by her adult stepbrother,

Nickey Silva. The court also granted DHS’s motion to terminate reunification services based

on the findings of sexual abuse and that there was little likelihood that services to the family

would result in successful reunification.

The termination hearing was held in August 2013. The DHS family service worker

testified that, although Lint had participated in multiple services in this case and in the prior

cases, he had not demonstrated an ability to properly care for or protect the children from

harm. There was evidence that Lint had denied that Nickey Silva had sexually abused J.L.

and that he had allowed other dangerous people to live in his home and be around the

children, including men accused of sexually abusing children. One of these men had a “true

finding” for sexually abusing J.L.

The trial court found that the statutory ground of aggravated circumstances had been

proved and that termination of Lint’s parental rights was in the best interest of the children

considering the likelihood that they would be adopted and the potential harm caused by

returning them to Lint’s custody. In compliance with Linker-Flores and Rule 6-9(i), Lint’s

counsel has examined the record for adverse rulings and has adequately discussed why there

is no arguable merit to an appeal of the decision to terminate Lint’s parental rights or the

2

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 280

numerous adverse rulings on evidentiary objections. After carefully examining the record and

the no-merit brief, we hold that Lint’s counsel has complied with the requirements for a no-

merit parental-rights-termination appeal and that the appeal is wholly without merit. We

therefore affirm the termination of Lint’s parental rights to B.L. and J.L. by memorandum

opinion, In re Memorandum Opinions, 16 Ark. App. 301, 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985), and grant the

motion to withdraw.

Affirmed; motion to withdraw granted.

WOOD and BROWN, JJ., agree.

Leah Lanford, Arkansas Public Defender Commission, for appellant.

No response.

3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.