FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. DN 17-11-0009
ANTHONY J. COSTELLO, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and JACQUENETTE S. CORGAN,
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.
P. AGARWAL, Guardian ad Litem.
and T.G., Appellees.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
S. CALLAHAN JUDGE.
Appellant Mother appeals the judgment of the Summit County
Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division, that placed her
child in the legal custody of the child's paternal
grandparents ("Grandparents"). This Court affirms.
Mother is the biological mother of J.G. (d.o.b. 5/28/14).
Paternity has been established. The child resided with
Mother, while Father has only had contact with the child a
couple times during her life. When J.G. was three-and-a-half
years old, Summit County Children Services Board
("CSB" or "the agency") filed a complaint
alleging the child to be abused and dependent based on
concerns regarding Mother's mental health, substance
abuse, and involvement in criminal activity. CSB later
withdrew its allegation of abuse, and Mother stipulated that
J.G. was a dependent child. The juvenile court granted
temporary custody of J.G. to CSB, who placed the child with
Grandparents. The juvenile court further adopted the
agency's case plan as the order of the court.
CSB filed a motion for legal custody to Grandparents. Mother
did not file a dispositional motion, but requested that she
be transported from the Community Based Correctional Facility
("CBCF") to attend the hearing on the agency's
motion. At the hearing, Mother conceded that she was not then
in a position to request legal custody of the child. Instead,
she informed the magistrate that she opposed the agency's
motion and requested more time, although she did not
explicitly move for a six-month extension of temporary
After a hearing, the magistrate issued a decision granting
CSB's motion for legal custody to Grandparents. Mother
filed objections, arguing that she had insufficient time to
work on her case plan objectives in pursuit of reunification
because she had been in and out of jail since the initiation
of the case. Both CSB and the guardian ad litem filed briefs
in opposition to Mother's objections. The guardian ad
litem noted that Mother never filed a motion for a six-month
extension of temporary custody. CSB argued that there was no
evidence to support a six-month extension of temporary
custody pursuant to the statutory factors listed in R.C.
2151.415(D)(1). The juvenile court issued a judgment,
overruling Mother's objections based on an analysis of
the statutory best interest of the child factors. The
juvenile court awarded legal custody of J.G. to Grandparents
and ordered that Mother could pursue supervised visitation
with the child. Mother filed a timely appeal in which she
raises two assignments of error for review.