Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Michael J. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security, 995 P.2d 682.

1245 citing documents.

Karla M. v. Larry J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
A.R. v. Dcs, Jessica S. 439 P.3d 1183 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
A.R. v. Dcs, Jessica S. 439 P.3d 1183 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Rick R. v. Dcs, H.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Rick R. v. Dcs, H.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Travis H. v. Dcs, A.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Travis H. v. Dcs, A.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Anthony L. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Jesus R., Deanna C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Jesus R., Deanna C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., regarding the length of his incarceration as well as the court’s best interest determination.
Anthony L. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Delcia F. v. Dcs, Z.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Delcia F. v. Dcs, Z.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ramiro A. v. Dcs, J.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ramiro A. v. Dcs, J.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Robert O. v. Mary B., A.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Monique H. v. Dcs, Et El. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Monique H. v. Dcs, Et El. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Robert O. v. Mary B., A.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶ 12 (2000), and by a preponderance of the evidence that termination is in the child’s best interests, Kent K., 210 Ariz. at 284, ¶ 22.
Lessie N., James D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Lessie N., James D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Melissa T. v. Dcs, P.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Fatuma H. v. Dcs, P.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Fatuma H. v. Dcs, P.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Melissa T. v. Dcs, P.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Darrin v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Darrin v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶ 27 (2000) (finding that if sufficient evidence supports the juvenile court’s order terminating a parent’s rights on any one of the statutory grounds, this Court need not address claims pertaining to the other grounds).
Ray M. v. Dcs, L.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ray M. v. Dcs, L.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., but “[b]y itself, the length of a parent’s sentence is not dispositive,” Jesus M., 203 Ariz. at 281, ¶ 9.
Mark M. v. Dcs, A.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Mark M. v. Dcs, A.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶ 27 (2000), and Maricopa Cty.
A.L. v. J.B. G.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
A.L. v. J.B. G.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
DISCUSSION ¶6 We have long recognized “that the right to the control and custody of one’s children is a fundamental one.” ¶ 11 (2000) (quoting Maricopa County Juv.
Alissa M. v. Dcs, B.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Alissa M. v. Dcs, B.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lionel M. v. Dcs, L.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lionel M. v. Dcs, L.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., -49, ¶ 12 (2000), and by a preponderance of the evidence that termination is in the best interests of the child, ¶ 24 (2005).
Raquel C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Raquel C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 12 (2000); ¶ 22 (2005).
Manuel T. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Manuel T. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 20 (2000), and Jennifer B. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Jennifer S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jennifer S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Aleise H. v. Dcs 432 P.3d 928 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Nicholios N. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Nicholios N. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., -49, ¶¶ 11-12 (2000).
Aleise H. v. Dcs 432 P.3d 928 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Quinton v. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Quinton v. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Tina v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by