Court of Appeals of Ohio, Sixth District, Sandusky
Court No. 21730237
Cordy, for appellant.
E. Ross, for appellee.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
1} Appellant, C.T., Sr., appeals the judgment of the
Sandusky County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division,
prohibiting him from having contact or visitation with his
minor child, C.T., Jr. (hereinafter referred to as
"C.T."). Finding no error in the proceedings below,
A. Facts and Procedural Background
2} On September 8, 2017, appellee, Sandusky County
Job and Family Services, received a report that C.T.'s
mother, B.F., had overdosed on heroin. Appellee investigated
the report, leading to the implementation of a safety plan
for B.F. and the placement of C.T. with his maternal aunt,
A.F. Thereafter, B.F. failed to comply with the terms of her
safety plan by failing drug screens and refusing to cooperate
with appellee's caseworkers. As a result, appellee filed
a complaint on November 2, 2017, alleging that C.T. was
dependent and neglected.
3} On December 1, 2017, the juvenile court held a
hearing on the complaint, at which B.F. consented to a
finding of probable cause for C.T.'s removal from her
home. Thereafter, B.F. agreed to continue A.F.'s
temporary custody of C.T.
4} A combined adjudicatory and dispositional hearing
was held on January 29, 2018, which resulted in the juvenile
court's determination that C.T. was a dependent and
neglected child. Following the dispositional portion of the
hearing, the juvenile court found that continuation of
A.F.'s temporary custody of C.T. was in C.T.'s best
interests. Appellant was not present at these proceedings
because he was incarcerated following his conviction for
possession of drugs. Due to appellant's incarceration,
his violent history, and a protection order that was in place
at the time, the juvenile court ordered that appellant was to
have no contact or visitation with C.T.
5} On December 6, 2018, the matter came before the
juvenile court for an annual dispositional review hearing.
Due to his incarceration, appellant was not present at the
hearing. Prior to the hearing, B.F. consented to a grant of
legal custody to A.F. The juvenile court terminated
appellee's protective supervision of C.T. and awarded
legal custody to A.F. after finding that such an award was in
C.T.'s best interests. Concerning appellant, the juvenile
Based upon Father's incarceration, his violent history
and a Protection Order in place, there shall be no contact or
visitation for Father and child at this time. Father was not
present for this hearing and has not filed any motions or
been involved with the minor child.
6} On January 2, 2019, appellant filed his timely
notice of appeal.