Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ******************************************************

IN RE JASON R. ET AL.* (AC 32651)
Robinson, Bear and Dupont, Js. Argued April 14--officially released June 28, 2011

(Appeal from Superior Court, judicial district of Middlesex, Child Protection Session at Middletown, Hon. Thayer Baldwin, Jr., judge trial referee.) Erich Henry Gaston, for the appellant (respondent mother). Tammy Nguyen-O'Dowd, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, were George Jepsen, attorney general, and Benjamin Zivyon, assistant attorney general, for the appellee (petitioner).

Opinion

BEAR, J. The respondent mother (respondent)1 appeals from the judgments of the trial court rendered in favor of the petitioner, the commissioner of children and families (petitioner), terminating her parental rights as to two of her children, Jason R. and Fernando R. (children).2 On appeal, the respondent claims that the court improperly (1) shifted the burden of proof to her on the issue of her personal rehabilitation, (2) concluded that the department of children and families (department) had made reasonable efforts to reunify her with Jason and Fernando, and (3) found that she had failed to achieve a sufficient degree of rehabilitation. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. The following facts and procedural history are relevant to our review. The respondent was born in Hartford in 1989. The respondent's mother had a history of substance abuse, and the respondent was raised by her grandmother. The department's involvement with the respondent began when she was a teenager. At that time, the respondent had mental health and behavioral problems. Fernando and Jason were born less than one year apart in 2006 and 2007, respectively.3 On December 13, 2007, the petitioner filed with the court neglect petitions and motions seeking ex parte orders of temporary custody of the children. These motions were denied by the court. On January 25, 2008, believing that the children were in imminent risk of physical harm from their surroundings and that immediate removal from such surroundings was necessary to ensure their safety, pursuant to General Statutes

Download In re Jason R..pdf

Connecticut Law