Cited by

¶11 Although “[p]arents possess a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children,” a juvenile court may terminate parental rights “so long as the parents whose rights are to be severed are provided with ‘fundamentally fair procedures’ that satisfy due process requirements.” ¶ 24 (2005).

¶27 Clear and convincing evidence “reflects a heightened standard of proof,” as it must indicate “that the thing to be proved is highly probable or reasonably certain.” –85, ¶ 25 (2005) (citation omitted).

against the independent and often adverse interests of the child in a safe and stable home life.” ¶ 35 (2005).

Michael J., 196 Ariz. at 249, ¶ 12; ¶ 41 (2005).

“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” -85, ¶ 25 (2005).

ontending the court abused its discretion by “ignoring” some evidence and giving Mother’s testimony more credibility than Father’s. ¶15 In addressing best interests, “we can presume that the interests of the parent and child diverge because the court has already found the existence of one of the statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence.” ¶ 35 (2005).

at 249, ¶ 12 (clear and convincing evidence); ¶ 42 (2005) (preponderance of the evidence); see A.R.S.

¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.

Sec., ¶ 12 (2000), and if termination is in the children’s best interests as proven by a preponderance of the evidence, ¶ 41 (2005).

“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” –85, ¶ 25 (2005).

Alma S., 245 Ariz. at 149 ¶ 8; ¶ 22 (2005) (determining that party seeking termination bears burden of proof to show termination ground by clear and convincing evidence); see also A.R.S.

Id.; ¶ 22 (2005) (determining that party seeking termination bears burden of proof to show termination ground by clear and convincing evidence).

¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.

A juvenile court may terminate parental rights under certain circumstances, “so long as the parents whose rights are to be severed are provided with ‘fundamentally fair procedures’ that satisfy due process requirements.” ¶ 24 (2005) (quoting Santosky, 455 U.S. at 754).

§§ 25-103(B)(1), -408(G); ¶¶ 21–22 (2005) (declining to apply heightened evidentiary burden absent express statutory language).

“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” –85 ¶ 25 (2005) (citation omitted).

against the independent and often adverse interests of the child in a safe and stable home life.” ¶ 35 (2005).

Evidence is “clear and convincing” if it is “highly probable or reasonably certain.” -85, ¶ 25 (2005) (citation omitted).

at 249, ¶ 12 (clear and convincing evidence); ¶ 42 (2005) (preponderance of the evidence); see A.R.S.

-85, ¶ 25 (2005) (internal quotation omitted).

at 249, ¶ 12; ¶ 41 (2005).

¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.

“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” -85, ¶ 25 (2005) (citation omitted).

against the independent and often adverse interests of the child in a safe and stable home life.” ¶ 35 (2005).