Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District, Muskingum
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Probate Division, Case
No. 2015- 4031
Appellant SEAN W. BECK USP ATLANTA 601 McDonough Boulevard,
Petitioner-Appellee W. ANDREW JOSEPH GOTTLIEB, JOHNSTON, BEAM
& DAL PONTE, PPL
JUDGES: Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, P.J. Hon. William B. Hoffman,
J. Hon. John W. Wise, J.
Appellant Sean W. Beck appeals the decision of the Muskingum
County Probate Court, which granted the adoption petition of
Appellee Michael Leary regarding the child J.L.M-L. The
relevant facts leading to this appeal are as follows.
Appellant Beck is the biological father of J.L.M.-L.
Appellant is presently incarcerated in a federal correctional
facility in Georgia. He asserts that he will be released in
2021, assuming eligibility for good time credits.
Appellee filed his petition for adoption in the Muskingum
County Probate Court on October 27, 2015. Appellant filed his
objection to the petition on November 16, 2015.
The matter came on for hearing on March 7, 2016 on the issue
of whether appellant's consent was required for the
adoption. In addition to appellee and his counsel,
appellant's counsel appeared, while appellant appeared
via telephonic connection. Following the hearing, via
judgment entry on May 5, 2016, the probate court ruled that
appellant's consent was not necessary pursuant to R.C.
On May 27, 2016, a hearing on best interests was conducted
under R.C. 3107.161. Again, in addition to appellee and his
counsel, appellant's counsel appeared, while appellant
appeared via telephonic connection.
On May 31, 2016, the probate court issued a final decree of
adoption on appellee's petition, and ordering a name
change for the child.
On June 29, 2016, Appellant Beck filed a notice of appeal.
Appellant's present brief fails to set forth a statement
of facts or a statement of the case and fails to properly set
forth assignments of error as required by App.R. 16(A)(3),
16(A)(5), and 16(A)(6). However, in the interest of justice,
we glean the following Assignments of Error from the brief
(see Helfrich v. City of Pataskala Planning &
Zoning, 5th Licking App. No. 00CA82, 2001 WL
"I. APPELLANTS TRIAL COUNSEL PROVIDED INEFFECTIVE
ASSISTANCE DURING THE ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS.
"II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY FAILING TO PROPERLY
CONSIDER THE ...