In re Pima County Juvenile Severance Action No. S-113432

Father (defendant) was the father of four children with Mother. Father and Mother were never married, and their relationship was characterized by violence. When Mother and Father ended their relationship, Mother married a few months later. The following year, Mother and Father entered into a stipulated custody agreement, which gave Mother custody of the four children and Father rights of visitation. However, visitation was problematic. For example, Father once used his vehicle to chase the children’s stepfather while the stepfather was driving with two of the children in the stepfather’s car. As a result, Father received a misdemeanor conviction for endangerment. Subsequently, a petition to terminate Father’s parental rights was filed by the children’s attorney and joined by Mother. Father filed a motion to dismiss the petition, arguing that both the children and their attorney lacked standing to file the petition. After a three-day hearing, Father’s rights were terminated due to his violent behavior and explosive personality, which affected all the children. Father appealed. Father made various arguments that were unavailing. For example, Father argued that permitting the children to file for termination would be contrary to other aspects of the law, which recognized that children were not legally able to do various things, such as drive or marry. The appellate court found that argument unpersuasive because the activities Father cited necessitated a particular level of maturity or capability. However, a child’s maturity had nothing to do with the child’s interest in a termination proceeding. Father also argued that because Arizona law referred to a child and a petitioner separately, the two could not be identical.