Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

2011AP533, 2011AP534, 2011AP535 In re the termination of parental rights to K’Wan M., et al.

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 21, 2011//

2011AP533, 2011AP534, 2011AP535 In re the termination of parental rights to K’Wan M., et al.

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//June 21, 2011//

Listen to this article

Juveniles
TPR; due process

Beverly H. appeals the order terminating her parental rights to her children K’wan, De’Jana, Da’Janique, and De’Shay. She contends that the trial court erred in relying on Wis. Stat. § 42.424(4) when it refused her request for an adjournment of the dispositional hearing following a jury verdict finding grounds to terminate her parental rights[4] because under Wis. Stat. § 48.31(7)(a), she should have been given a “reasonable time to prepare” for the dispositional hearing. Beverly H. submits the best way to resolve the conflict between the two statutes is for this court to remand the matter and grant her a new dispositional hearing. She also claims that the failure of the trial court to grant her an adjournment resulted in a violation of her due process rights.
This Court disagrees with Beverly H.’s arguments on appeal. Whether this court applies the legal doctrine holding that when there are conflicting statutes a specific statute trumps a general statute, or whether it applies the legal doctrine holding that this court is obligated to harmonize conflicting statutes, the conclusion is the same: the trial court did not err in relying on Wis. Stat. § 42.424(4) to immediately proceed to the dispositional hearing following trial. Section 48.424(4) is the specific statute addressing fact finding hearings in TPR cases, and Wis. Stat. § 48.31(7)(a) is the general statute; therefore, § 48.424(4) controls. Furthermore, when the two statutes are harmonized, § 48.424(4) is the operative statute to be utilized after a fact finder finds grounds have been proved for the TPR. Finally, this court also concludes that Beverly H.’s due process rights were not violated by the denial of an adjournment. Consequently, this court affirms. This opinion will not be published.

2011AP533, 2011AP534, 2011AP535 In re the termination of parental rights to K’Wan M., et al.

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Murray, J., Curley, P.J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Jensen, Jeffrey W., Milwaukee; For Respondent: Sowinski, Mary M., Milwaukee

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests