Child Law

Court found Respondent mother unfit and found it in best interest of her minor child to terminate mother's parental rights. Court's finding that mother failed to make reasonable progress toward return of minor was during 9-month period, when mother failed to substantially fulfill obligations of service plan and failed to correct conditions that brought minor into foster care, was not against manifest weight of evidence. No violation of due process. Court's actions did not predetermine outcome of best interest hearing, as court's changes of permanency goals indicated mother was not progressing toward reunification.  (LYTTON and SCHMIDT, concurring.)

Respondent, then age 17, was charged in petition for adjudication of wardship with aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (AUUW) based on possession of handgun without FOID card and his age. Based on Respondent’s previous adjudications of delinquency for armed robbery and AUUW, and that his current offense of AUUW was a Class 2 felony, State filed notice of intent to prosecute respondent as a violent juvenile offender (VJO) pursuant to section 5-820 of Juvenile Court Adt. Respondent was sentenced to mandatory incarceration at Department of Juvenile Justice until age 21.The VJO statute does not violate the proportionate penalties clause of Illinois Constitution.(ELLIS and HOWSE, concurring.)

Court terminated parental rights of father of minor, then age 6. Father failed to raise issue of personal jurisdiction for almost 2 years after he was identified as the father and was appointed counsel. That delay was unreasonable, and laches applies. Father is chargeable with want of due diligence in assertion that court lacked personal jurisdiction for adjudication and dispositional orders.(McBRIDE and BURKE, concurring.)

State charged Respondent, then age 12, for taking lighters from a gas station while armed with a knife. Court adjudicated Respondent a delinquent minor and order him to serve 24 months of probation, including that he was prohibited from being present on University of Illinois campus unless granted permission by his probation officer or accompanied by parent, guardian, or custodian.  Condition of probation excluding him from university campus was not an unconstitutional infringement on his right to travel, and was reasonable and consistent with goals of fostering rehabilitation and protecting public.(HARRIS and APPLETON, concurring.)

Court found Respondent mother unfit under Section 50/1(D)(b) of Adoption Act, and ordered termination of her parental rights over her 2 minor children. State alleged that her 8-month-old child had sustained abusive head trauma, and that mother's explanations were not consistent with his injuries. Mother refused to participate in and complete her services, had lack of interaction with her service providers, had continued and elevated drug use, and failed to maintain regular visitation with her children. Court's determination that mother was unfit udner Section 1(D)(b) was not against manifest weight of evidence, as evidence showed that mother did not maintain a reasonable degree of responsibility toward their welfare. (LAVIN and COBBS, concurring.)

Mother, whose parental rights were terminated, failed to file a timely notice of appeal or any motion requesting leave to file a late notice of appeal, and thus failed to invoke jurisdiction of appellate court. Although order terminating parental rights is automatically stayed for 60 days before the minor can be adopted, no rule provides for appeal period to be extended past 30 days. (MOORE and OVERSTREET, concurring.) 

After fitness hearing, court found Respondent mother unfit, and terminated her parental rights as to her 2 sons. Respondent's admission of unfitness was knowing and voluntary; she was represented by counsel at all proceedings, and court admonished her at every hearing at every stage that she risked termination of parental rights if she did not cooperate with DCFS and follow service plan. Evidence at best-interest hearing showed that Respondent failed to understand the risk that her boyfriend, a convicted sex offender, presented to her sons, and that she was untruthful about her continuing relationship with him and did not begin chaperone training with him.(HOLDER WHITE and APPLETON, concurring.)