OTT LAW

IN THE INTEREST OF: A.S.L.B., a child under seventeen years of age. GREENE COUNTY JUVENILE OFFICE, Petitioner-Respondent, vs. D.D.C., Respondent-Appellant.

Decision date: January 10, 2018SD34985

Slip Opinion Notice

This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Opinion

1

IN THE INTEREST OF: ) A.S.L.B., a child under seventeen years ) of age. ) ) GREENE COUNTY JUVENILE OFFICE, ) ) Petitioner-Respondent, ) ) vs. ) No. SD34985 ) D.D.C., ) Filed: January 10, 2018 ) Respondent-Appellant. )

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF GREENE COUNTY

Honorable Becky J.W. Borthwick, Associate Circuit Judge

AFFIRMED

D.D .C ., the biological father ("Father") of A.S .L.B. ("Child"), appeals the termination of his parental rights on the basis that the termination was not in the best interest of Child. In his point relied on, Father purports to challenge every factual finding of the trial court; however, Father actually complains only that each finding is against "the logic of the circumstances." For instance, Father does not claim that the finding that Father has no emotional ties to Child was error, but instead rationalizes that there was no way he could have an emotional tie to Child because he was not offered visits with Child

2 while he was in jail and did not have money to send letters from jail. Each of the other complaints likewise rationalize each of the court's findings as being against the logic of the circumstances because of his long incarceration. Father's point is denied; the judgment is affirmed. To summarize, evidence was presented that, at the time of the trial, Father had been sentenced as a prior and persistent offender for several offenses, including a charge of child endangerment of another child of Father's. Father, while under the influence of methamphetamine, inflicted severe injuries, including skull fractures, on his child when the child was only a couple of months old. Per an exhibit from the Department of Corrections, Father's sentence summary includes a maximum discharge date of January 2035, and both mandatory and conditional release dates of January 2032. 1

Prior to his current sentence, Father had been out of prison but had had no contact with Child. He did not provide any financial support, only wrote five or six letters to Child, and provided no support for his claim that he had taken drug treatment and parenting classes. Child was in a potential adoptive home. The trial court certainly did not abuse its discretion. The judgment is affirmed.

Nancy Steffen Rahmeyer, P.J. - Opinion Author

Jeffrey W. Bates, J. - Concurs

Daniel E. Scott, J. - Concurs

1 Father testified that he may be released in January 2018, if he successfully completes a drug treatment program; however, the court was free to disregard this testimony as speculative.

Related Opinions

Rodney Lee Lincoln, Appellant, vs. State of Missouri, Respondent.(2014)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictDecember 2, 2104#ED100987

affirmed
criminal-lawmajority4,922 words

State of Missouri, Respondent, v. James McGregory, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictMarch 10, 2026#ED113080

affirmed

McGregory appealed his convictions for domestic assault in the third degree and property damage in the second degree, raising unpreserved claims of error regarding evidence admissibility and the Crime Victims' Compensation Fund judgment amount. The court affirmed the convictions but modified the CVC judgment amount, finding the trial court entered a judgment in excess of that authorized by law.

criminal-lawper_curiam3,374 words

STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent v. RUSSELL KENNETH CLANCY, Appellant(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern DistrictFebruary 25, 2026#SD38782

affirmed

The court affirmed Clancy's conviction for second-degree assault against a special victim after a jury trial. The evidence was sufficient to prove that Clancy punched an elderly civilian in the face and struck a police officer during an altercation at a laundromat, supporting the conviction under Missouri statute § 565.052.3.

criminal-lawper_curiam1,516 words

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. James Willis Peters, Appellant.(2026)

Supreme Court of MissouriFebruary 24, 2026#SC101218

remanded

James Willis Peters appealed his conviction for driving while intoxicated as a chronic offender, challenging whether the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that all four of his prior offenses were intoxication-related traffic offenses. The court found the state failed to sufficiently prove his 2002 offense was an IRTO and therefore vacated the judgment and remanded for resentencing.

criminal-lawper_curiam3,993 words

State of Missouri, Respondent, vs. Gerald R. Nytes, Appellant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 17, 2026#ED113261

affirmed

Gerald Nytes appealed his conviction for violating a full order of protection, arguing the State failed to prove he had notice of the order as required by statute. The court affirmed, finding sufficient evidence of notice based on Nytes's presence at the contested order of protection hearing and his subsequent violation through phone calls made from jail to the protected party.

criminal-lawper_curiam1,603 words