Opinion

State v. Doe

  • 143 Idaho 343
  • 144 P.3d 597
  • 2006 Ida. LEXIS 126
Court
Idaho Supreme Court
Filed
Sep 25, 2006
Status
Published
Author
Eismann
On the bench
Trout, Eismann, Burdick, Jones, Schroeder
Cited by
355 cases

holding that the magistrate court’s findings were sufficient and amply supported by the record even if additional details would have been helpful

How later courts described this case

  • holding that the magistrate court’s findings were sufficient and amply supported by the record even if additional details would have been helpful
  • explaining “Doe was sentenced to probation for felony domestic battery”
  • providing “[e]ach statutory ground is an independent basis for termination”
  • addressing only one statutory ground

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Justice EISMANN,

specially concurring.

I concur in the majority opinion, but I also agree with the dissent that the trial court’s findings of fact are woefully inadequate. I also agree that the trial court erred in holding against Doe the fact that the woman he chose to marry would later prove inadequate as a parent. The trial court’s conclusory findings, however, are supported by uncontradicted evidence. Had the evidence been disputed, I would vote to vacate the judgment and remand for further findings.

As the majority opinion states, “Doe spent only six weeks with Jane, out of a possible two years where he was free from incarceration and the very act of absconding intentionally cut off all contact with Jane.” Prior to his incarceration, Doe had ample opportunity to demonstrate, by his conduct, that he could be a parent to Jane. He did not do so. After he was placed on probation, he chose to abscond and flee to Seattle. During the approximate year he was on the run, he did not provide Jane with anything. His decision to abscond also resulted in his current incarceration.

Once he was incarcerated, Doe decided that he would like to make an effort to have some relationship with Jane. It is simply too little too late. The uncontradicted evidence shows that he neglected Jane and that such neglect justifies terminating his parental rights.

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.