AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) initiated abuse and neglect proceedings against a custodian and the mother of the child, alleging that the custodian had sexually abused the child and her older sister for years, and that the mother was aware of the abuse but failed to prevent it. During the adjudicatory hearing, a detective testified that the custodian admitted to sexually touching the child while she was clothed. The mother attempted to call the child as a witness, but the court sustained an objection due to procedural issues. The district court adjudicated the child as abused and neglected by the custodian and neglected by the mother (paras 2).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (CYFD): Argued that the custodian sexually abused the child and her sister, and that the mother was aware of the abuse but did not act to prevent it.
• Respondent-Appellant (Custodian): Challenged several evidentiary rulings, the non-production of his recorded confession, and contended that the evidence was insufficient to support the adjudication of abuse and neglect.
• Mother: Testified about her long-term relationship with the custodian and his role as a father figure to the child, and attempted to call the child as a witness, which was objected to and sustained by the court (para 2).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court's evidentiary rulings were correct.
• Whether CYFD was required to produce the custodian's recorded confession.
• Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the adjudication of abuse and neglect (para 3).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s adjudicatory judgment determining that the custodian abused and neglected the child (para 1).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per Chief Judge Jennifer L. Attrep, with Judges Megan P. Duffy and Shammara H. Henderson concurring, held that:
  The custodian's claims concerning the district court's evidentiary rulings were unpreserved for appeal due to a failure to demonstrate how they were preserved below, as required by appellate rules (paras 4-5).
  The custodian did not establish that CYFD's failure to produce his recorded confession was erroneous, as CYFD convincingly argued it did not possess the recording (para 8).
  The adjudication of abuse was supported by substantial evidence, including the custodian's admission to sexually touching the child and other testimonies suggesting coercion and abuse within the custodian's position of authority over the child (paras 9-12).
  The court declined to review other claims of error raised by the custodian due to inadequate development of these arguments in the briefing (para 13).