ILNews

‘Marijuana legal elsewhere’ claim no help in parental termination appeal

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Termination of parental rights was properly granted for a molesting father in federal prison and a drug-using mother who failed to comply with court-ordered services after striking a child.

The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the Wabash Circuit Court ruling in In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: S.L. & D.L. (Minor Children) and K.M., (Mother) & D.L.,(Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, 85A02-1304-JT-308.

Judge Nancy Vaidik wrote that the trial court’s findings of fact were sufficient and warranted termination of parental rights. Federal authorities didn’t allow father to participate in the termination hearings, but he was represented by counsel and received transcripts of two of three hearings. The panel rejected arguments that his due process rights were violated, noting this was only raised on appeal.

Mother had tested positive for marijuana, methamphetamine and synthetic drugs, according to the record, and indicated uncertainty about severing ties with father despite her belief that he posed a molestation threat to their children. She also argued that she eventually had clean drug screens, which the court noted was after she was behind bars.

The court also noted mother argued “her marijuana use is ‘not a sufficient reason’ for terminating her parental rights. … She claims that ‘there are many people in the United States that agree with her about marijuana’ and cites the legalization of recreational marijuana use in other states as support for her claim.

“Assuming for the sake of argument that this is true, Mother fails to acknowledge that recreational marijuana use is not legal in Indiana and, more importantly, that one of the prerequisites for reunification with her children was that she not use marijuana. Nonetheless, Mother used marijuana frequently during the termination proceedings,” Vaidik wrote in affirming the trial court.  



 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • I forgot to mention
    The last 3 Presidents of the US all smoked marijuana. No one has ever died from smoking marijuana. Almost every day medical studies are being reported showing amazing benefits to consuming marijuana. Drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco are far more dangerous to your health.
  • Note on marijuana
    George Washington grew it for 20 years on his farm and in his diary which you can view on line speculated about the medical benefits of smoking marijuana. Thomas Jefferson grew it and smoked it. Betsy Ross' flag, the sails of Columbus' 3 ships, and the early drafts of the Constitution of the US and Declaration of Independence were all made from hemp.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

    2. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

    3. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

    4. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

    5. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

    ADVERTISEMENT