IN RE: D.D. D.M. D.D. B.S. B.S. S.R.
FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
LORAIN, OHIO CASE Nos. 14JC44220 14JC4422114JC44222 14JC44223
BRANDON G. OLIVER, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
P. WILL, Prosecuting Attorney, and PREETHI KISHMAN, Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
Appellant, Charmaine D. ("Mother"), appeals from a
judgment of the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile
Division, that placed her minor children in the legal custody
of three different relatives. This Court affirms.
Mother is the biological mother of the six minor children at
issue in this appeal. The children's fathers did not
appeal from the trial court's judgment.
During September 2014, Lorain County Children Services
("LCCS") began working with this family through a
case that had been transferred from Cuyahoga County. Although
initial concerns about abuse of the children were not
substantiated, LCCS later filed complaints to allege that
Mother was not meeting the basic needs of the children and
that they were being exposed to Mother's mental health
problems and domestic violence between Mother and the father
of the youngest child ("Father R.").
The children were adjudicated neglected and dependent and
initially remained in the custody of Mother under an order of
protective supervision by LCCS. During August 2015, because
Mother was not complying with the reunification requirements
of the case plan, the children were placed in the temporary
custody of different relatives with protective supervision by
The case plan reunification goals included that Mother engage
in treatment to address her long-term problems with domestic
violence, mental illness, and substance abuse; complete
parenting classes; and obtain stable income and housing. The
case plan also required her to have no contact with Father
R., who was convicted of domestic violence against her.
Mother had a long history of domestic violence with Father R.
and other men with whom she had been romantically involved.
After the children were removed from her home, Mother
initially worked on the reunification goals of the case plan.
LCCS eventually permitted Mother to have weekend visits with
the children until it learned that Father R. had been in
Mother's home during the visits. During one of those
visits, the children had again been exposed to an altercation
between Mother and Father R. Although LCCS continued to
receive reports that Father R. had been to her home, Mother
denied that Father R. had been there.
LCCS later moved to have three of the children placed in the
legal custody of the maternal grandmother, two of them placed
in the legal custody of a paternal aunt of one of the
children, and the youngest child placed in the legal custody
of a maternal aunt. Mother alternatively moved to have the
children returned to her legal custody or for a six-month
extension of temporary custody. Following a hearing on the
competing dispositional motions, the magistrate decided that
the children should be placed in the legal custody of the
respective relatives. The trial court later overruled
Mother's objections to the magistrate's decision and
placed the children in the legal custody of the relatives.
Mother appeals and raises three assignments of error.