Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Kent K. v. Bobby M., 110 P.3d 1013.

1357 citing documents.

Jeanna T. v. Dcs, A.I. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 35 (2005); see also Maricopa Cnty.
Olga C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Kari M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Michael C., Tyana T. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Michael C., Tyana T. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Olga C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Kari M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 24 (2005) (“Application of the proper standard of proof in a termination hearing is a critical component of the ‘fundamentally fair procedures’ necessary to satisfy due process.”).
Juan P. v. Dcs, S.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Juan P. v. Dcs, S.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Erika C. v. Dcs, I.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Erika C. v. Dcs, I.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” –85 ¶ 25 (2005).
Tasha R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Tasha R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Jessica S. v. Dcs, A.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Enrique N. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Jessica S. v. Dcs, A.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶17 “Parents possess a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children.” ¶ 24 (2005).
Enrique N. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Sec., ¶ 12 (2000), and find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that termination is in the best interests of the child, ¶ 22 (2005).
Jesse M. v. Dcs, G.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Jesse M. v. Dcs, G.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Aaron F. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Aaron F. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
§ 8-537(B); –84, ¶ 19 (2005).
Nelturiah S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Nelturiah S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Sec., ¶ 12 (2000), and find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that termination is in the best interests of the child, ¶ 22 (2005).
Jose F. v. Dcs, A.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Jose F. v. Dcs, A.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Shira H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Layke H. v. Dcs, M.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Layke H. v. Dcs, M.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Shira H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Andrea F., Joshua W. v. Dcs, E.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Andrea F., Joshua W. v. Dcs, E.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
DISCUSSION ¶13 Parents have a “fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children.” ¶ 24 (2005) (citing Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753 (1982)).
Jesse S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Jesse S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
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), and we must not “subordinate the interests of the child to those of the parent once a determination of unfitness has been made,” Alma S., 245 Ariz. at 151 ¶ 15.
State v. Kogan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
State v. Kogan Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
–85, ¶ 25 (2005) (citation omitted).
Tara R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Tara R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Derek S. v. Dcs, J.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Jeremy M. v. Dcs, B.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Jeremy M. v. Dcs, B.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
The court must also find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that termination is in the best interests of the child, ¶ 22 (2005).
Derek S. v. Dcs, J.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Desiree v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Kristina J. v. Dcs, K.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Sarah B. v. Dcs, K.J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Sarah B. v. Dcs, K.J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Desiree v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Kristina J. v. Dcs, K.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
DISCUSSION ¶12 Although not absolute, parents have “a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children.” ¶ 24 (2005).
Lara S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Lara S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Asaunte W. v. Dcs, N.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020