Cited by

Sec., ¶ 22 (2000) (affirming that a parent “must act persistently” to establish and maintain a relationship with his child and “must vigorously assert his legal rights to the extent necessary”).

Sec., ¶ 18 (2000) (“abandonment is measured not by a parent’s subjective intent, but by the parent’s conduct.”).

Sec., –49 ¶ 12 (2000) (quoting In re Pima Cnty.

Sec., –52, ¶ 29 (2000), and found that Child would be deprived of a 3 IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO R.T.

Sec., ¶ 39 (2000) (Zlaket, C.J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) (stating that given “[t]he right to have custody and care of .

Sec., ¶ 25 (2000 (noting the “burden to act as a parent rests with the parent, who should assert his legal rights at the first and every opportunity”).

Sec., ¶ 22 (2000) (quotation omitted).

He argues insufficient evidence supports the court’s

Sec., ¶ 12 (2000); ¶ 41 (2005).

Sec., ¶ 20 (2000); In re B.W., 153 Ariz. Cases Dig.

Sec., -50 (2000), and concluded that Father’s length of incarceration will deprive J.V.

Sec., –49, ¶¶ 11–12 (2000).

Sec., ¶ 12 (2000), and, by a preponderance of the evidence, that termination is in the child’s best interests, ¶ 22 (2005).