No. 14286
IN THE SUPREME (BURT O THE STATE O MONTANA
F F
1978
IN THE MATTER OF DMILARING
T.E.R. Youth in Need of Care.
Appeal fram: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Tenth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t ,
Honorable LRRoy L. McKimn, Judge presiding.
Counsel of m d
r :
For Appellant:
William E. Berger argued, Lewistown, Montana
For Respondent:
Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, H e l e n a , Montana
W i l l i a m Spoja, Jr. , County Attorney, Ledstawn, I%ntana
Timothy O'Hare, Deputy County Attorney, argued, Lewistown,
Montana
K. M b e r t Foster argued, Lewistown, Montana
Skmitted: November 21, 1978
Decided:
PFp 979 FEi3 i, * 79'79
Filed :
M r . J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e
Court.
T h i s i s an a p p e a l by t h e p a r e n t s of a minor c h i l d from
a judgment and o r d e r e n t e r e d October 1 7 , 1977, i n t h e Youth
Court of t h e Tenth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Fergus County, t h e
Honorable LeRoy L. McKinnon p r e s i d i n g . The judgment de-
c l a r e d T.E.R. t o be a Youth i n Need of C a r e and awarded
permanent custody of T.E.R. t o t h e Department of S o c i a l and
R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s of t h e S t a t e of Montana (SRS) w i t h
a u t h o r i t y t o consent t o her adoption.
O October 29, 1975, James Longin, t h e p r i n c i p a l a t
n
T.E.R.'s s c h o o l , n o t i f i e d Roberta Knopp, a c h i l d w e l f a r e
caseworker, t h a t T.E.R. might be t h e v i c t i m of c h i l d abuse.
Subsequent t o h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n , M s . Knopp o f f e r e d " p r o t e c -
t i v e s e r v i c e s " which c o n s i s t e d of r e g u l a r v i s i t s t o t h e
c h i l d ' s home. Over t h e c o u r s e of t h e n e x t y e a r and a h a l f ,
s h e maintained c o n t a c t w i t h T.E.R., n o t i c i n g , on o c c a s i o n ,
a number of b r u i s e s which s h e s u s p e c t e d t o be t h e r e s u l t of
some abuse.
Among o t h e r t h i n g s , testimony i n d i c a t e d t h a t T.E.R. is
b r i g h t f o r her age b u t n o t w e l l adjusted. I n February 1977,
s h o r t l y b e f o r e h e r t w e l f t h b i r t h d a y and w h i l e a t t e n d i n g t h e
f o u r t h g r a d e , s h e e x h i b i t e d t h i s poor a d j u s t m e n t by damaging
two c e i l i n g t i l e s i n a restroom a t h e r s c h o o l . The s c h o o l ' s
p r i n c i p a l , who had been working w i t h T.E.R. and h e r p a r e n t s
p e r i o d i c a l l y f o r two y e a r s , wrote h e r p a r e n t s d e t a i l i n g t h e
i n c i d e n t and suggested c e r t a i n changes i n t h e i r t r e a t m e n t of
T.E.R.
A few weeks a f t e r t h i s i n c i d e n t , M s . Knopp p l a c e d
T.E.R. i n 2 4 hour day c a r e because h e r s t e p f a t h e r had been
h o s p i t a l i z e d and h e r mother was working o u t s i d e t h e home a t
a j o b which r e q u i r e d h e r p r e s e n c e 2 4 h o u r s e a c h day. After
a month had p a s s e d under t h i s a r r a n g e m e n t , M s . Knopp t o l d
T.E.R. t h a t s h e would b e t a k i n g h e r back home s h o r t l y .
T.E.R. r e a c t e d t o t h i s s u g g e s t i o n w i t h some a l a r m a n d , a f t e r
some p r o d d i n g , t o l d M s . Knopp of r e c e n t i n c i d e n t s of s e x u a l
a b u s e by h e r s t e p f a t h e r . The i n c i d e n t s had a l l e g e d l y i n -
c r e a s e d i n f r e q u e n c y s i n c e h e r mother had t a k e n t h e job
which k e p t h e r away from t h e f a m i l y home.
On Monday, A p r i l 1 5 , 1977, two d a y s a f t e r t h e i r t a l k ,
M s . Knopp took T.E.R. t o a d o c t o r who performed a p e l v i c
examination. The d o c t o r t o l d M s . Knopp t h a t t h e r e was
e v i d e n c e o f s e x u a l c o n t a c t and M s . Knopp immediately p l a c e d
T.E.R. i n a f o s t e r home i n Harlowton, Montana. One week
l a t e r , on Monday, A p r i l 22, 1977, t h e d e p u t y c o u n t y a t t o r n e y
f o r F e r g u s County, f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r y o u t h h e a r i n g ,
a l l e g i n g t h a t T.E.R. w a s a y o u t h i n need of s u p e r v i s i o n
b e c a u s e of t h e F e b r u a r y i n c i d e n t a t s c h o o l and b e c a u s e s h e
was " h a b i t u a l l y d i s o b e d i e n t and beyond p a r e n t a l c o n t r o l " .
On May 4 , 1977, a h e a r i n g was h e l d a t which T.E.R. was
r e p r e s e n t e d by a n a t t o r n e y , t h e S t a t e was r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e
d e p u t y c o u n t y a t t o r n e y , and T . E . R . ' s parents represented
themselves. On motion of t h e a t t o r n e y r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e
c h i l d , t h e p e t i t i o n w a s o r a l l y amended t o i n c l u d e a l l e g a -
t i o n s t h a t T.E.R. w a s a y o u t h i n need o f care. T.E.R. gave
h e r s t a t e m e n t i n chambers, o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of h e r
parents. While s h e w a s t e s t i f y i n g , h e r s t e p f a t h e r appar-
e n t l y s u f f e r e d a h e a r t a t t a c k and w a s t a k e n t o t h e h o s p i t a l .
A t that time, t h e d e p u t y c o u n t y a t t o r n e y moved t h a t t h e
h e a r i n g b e c o n t i n u e d u n t i l t h e S t a t e c o u l d f i l e a n amended
p e t i t i o n i n s e r t i n g t h e c h a r g e t h a t T.E.R. w a s a youth i n
need of care and have t h e amended p e t i t i o n s s e r v e d on a l l
parties. T h i s w a s done on J u n e 2, 1977.
Subsequent h e a r i n g s , on J u l y 7 and August 4 , p r i m a r i l y
a d d r e s s e d a l l e g a t i o n s of p h y s i c a l and s e x u a l abuse by T . E . R . ' ~
stepfather. T.E.R.'s s t e p f a t h e r denied t h e s e a l l e g a t i o n s
a n d , through h i s a t t o r n e y , a t t e m p t e d t o prove t h a t T.E.R.
had a r e p u t a t i o n f o r u n t r u t h f u l n e s s and t h a t i f s h e had been
s e x u a l l y a c t i v e , i t would have been w i t h neighborhood boys.
On a p p e a l t h e p a r e n t s p r e s e n t f o u r i s s u e s f o r o u r con-
sideration. They c a n b e summarized and s t a t e d a s f o l l o w s :
1. Whether t h e Youth Court e r r e d i n a l l o w i n g t h e c h i l d
t o t e s t i f y o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of h e r p a r e n t s a s t o t h e
a l l e g e d s e x u a l and p h y s i c a l abuse by h e r s t e p f a t h e r .
2. Whether t h e Youth Court abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n
making a f i n d i n g of s e x u a l abuse based p r i m a r i l y on t h e
c h i l d ' s d i s p u t e d testimony.
3. Whether t h e Youth C o u r t e r r e d by c o n s i d e r i n g T . E . R . ' s
r e p o r t c a r d s , s u b m i t t e d s u b s e q u e n t t o t h e h e a r i n g by t h e
Department of S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s .
4. Whether t h e S t a t e followed p r o p e r p r o c e d u r e s i n
t a k i n g T.E.R. i n t o c u s t o d y and m a i n t a i n i n g c u s t o d y pending
t h e Youth C o u r t ' s u l t i m a t e d e t e r m i n a t i o n on t h e p e t i t i o n
a l l e g i n g h e r t o be a youth i n need of c a r e .
T.E.R. t e s t i f i e d on two o c c a s i o n s ; b o t h t i m e s s h e was
p e r m i t t e d t o t e s t i f y o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of h e r p a r e n t s .
On t h e f i r s t o c c a s i o n , a t t h e May 4 h e a r i n g , s h e was ques-
t i o n e d by t h e a t t o r n e y a p p o i n t e d t o r e p r e s e n t h e r and by t h e
d e p u t y county a t t o r n e y . I t was w h i l e t h i s t e s t i m o n y was
being given t h a t T.E.R.'s stepfather suffered a heart attack
i n t h e courtroom where h e was w a i t i n g w i t h T . E . R . ' s mother.
The second t i m e T.E.R. was q u e s t i o n e d was a t t h e ~ u l y
7
hearing. On t h a t o c c a s i o n t h e a t t o r n e y f o r t h e p a r e n t s was
g i v e n t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o cross-examine.
The p a r e n t s a r g u e t h a t t h e a l l e g a t i o n s made by T.E.R.
i n t h e c o u r s e of h e r testimony amounted t o c h a r g i n g h e r
s t e p f a t h e r w i t h c r i m i n a l conduct and t h a t he was t h e r e f o r e
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y e n t i t l e d t o confront h i s accuser. W do
e
not agree. A t t h e o u t s e t i t should be noted t h a t a " p e t i -
t i o n a l l e g i n g abuse, n e g l e c t , o r dependency i s a c i v i l
a c t i o n brought i n t h e name of t h e s t a t e of Montana. . ."
S e c t i o n 10-1310(3), R.C.M. 1947, now s e c t i o n 41-3-401(3)
MCA. The o v e r r i d i n g p o l i c y which u n d e r l i e s a l l a c t i o n s
i n v o l v i n g p o t e n t i a l l y abused c h i l d r e n i s " t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e
p r o t e c t i o n of c h i l d r e n whose h e a l t h and w e l f a r e a r e a d v e r s e l y
a f f e c t e d and f u r t h e r t h r e a t e n e d by t h e conduct of t h o s e
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r c a r e and p r o t e c t i o n . " S e c t i o n 10-
1303, R.C.M. 1947, now s e c t i o n 41-3-101(2) MCA. Under
c i r c u m s t a n c e s such a s t h o s e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e ,
i t may be n e c e s s a r y f o r a c h i l d ' s testimony t o be t a k e n
o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of " t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r c a r e
and p r o t e c t i o n . " W t h e r e f o r e hold t h a t a c h i l d may t e s t i f y
e
o u t s i d e t h e p r e s e n c e of h i s p a r e n t s i n a c a s e i n v o l v i n g
a l l e g a t i o n s of abuse and n e g l e c t , s u b j e c t t o cross-examina-
t i o n by t h e p a r e n t s ' a t t o r n e y , when t h e p r e s i d i n g judge
d e t e r m i n e s t h a t i t i s t h e most l i k e l y method of d i s c o v e r i n g
t h e whole t r u t h a s t o t h e a l l e g e d abuse o r n e g l e c t .
The n e x t i s s u e p r e s e n t e d r e f e r s t o t h e c o u r t ' s F i n d i n g
of F a c t No. 1 2 :
"12. That the step-father has fondled t h e s a i d
youth, and has attempted t o have s e x u a l r e l a -
t i o n s with her on many o c c a s i o n s when t h e mother
was n o t i n the home."
The p a r e n t s a r g u e t h a t t h e judge e r r e d i n making such a
f i n d i n g i n l i g h t of testimony adduced a t t h e h e a r i n g t h a t
T.E.R. h a s l i e d a t t i m e s t o avoid punishment and t h a t s h e
does n o t wish t o l i v e w i t h h e r s t e p f a t h e r . However, our
r e v i e w of t h e t e s t i m o n y d o e s n o t r e v e a l t h a t t h e Youth C o u r t
c l e a r l y abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n a r r i v i n g a t t h i s d e t e r m i n a -
tion. Where t e s t i m o n y i s d i r e c t l y c o n f l i c t i n g w e presume
t h a t t h e j u d g e ' s f i n d i n g s a r e c o r r e c t b e c a u s e he w a s p r e s e n t
when t h e t e s t i m o n y was g i v e n and had t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o
o b s e r v e t h e demeanor of t h e w i t n e s s e s . H e l l i c k s o n v. B a r r e t t
Mobile Home Transp. ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 1 6 1 Mont. 455, 460, 507 P.2d
523, 526. A s a r e s u l t , w e do n o t f i n d t h a t t h e Youth C o u r t
abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n making a f i n d i n g o f s e x u a l a b u s e
based p r i m a r i l y on t h e c h i l d ' s d i s p u t e d t e s t i m o n y .
The p a r e n t s ' t h i r d i s s u e c o n c e r n s T . E . R . ' s school
r e p o r t c a r d which w a s s u b m i t t e d t o t h e judge f o r h i s con-
s i d e r a t i o n some t i m e a f t e r t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e August 4
hearing. I n f a c t he d i d n o t r e c e i v e t h e r e p o r t c a r d u n t i l
sometime i n October. A s evidence, t h e r e p o r t card f a l l s
w i t h i n Rule 8 0 3 ( 6 ) , Mont.R.Evid., which e x c e p t s r e c o r d s o f
r e g u l a r l y conducted a c t i v i t y from t h e h e a r s a y p r o h i b i t i o n .
The f a c t t h a t t h e r e p o r t c a r d was b r o u g h t t o t h e j u d g e ' s
a t t e n t i o n a f t e r t h e c o n c l u s i o n of t h e h e a r i n g i s somewhat
d i s t u r b i n g b u t d o e s n o t amount t o r e v e r s i b l e e r r o r . First,
t h e r e p o r t card w a s n o t i n existence a t t h e time t h e hearing
concluded. Second, t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h e c h i l d r e q u i r e
some d e g r e e of f l e x i b i l i t y i n p r o c e d u r e t o i n s u r e t h a t a l l
e v i d e n c e p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s of t h e c h i l d
may b e c o n s i d e r e d . I n addition, counsel f o r t h e parents
knew o f t h i s r e p o r t c a r d and h a s n e v e r q u e s t i o n e d i t s a u t h e n -
ticity. W f i n d under t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of t h e i n s t a n t
e
c a s e t h a t t h e Youth C o u r t d i d n o t err i n c o n s i d e r i n g T . E . R . ' s
r e p o r t card.
The f i n a l i s s u e r a i s e d by t h e p a r e n t s c o n c e r n s t h e
p r o c e d u r e by which T.E.R. w a s t a k e n from h e r home by Ms.
Knopp, t h e caseworker from SRS. What d i d n o t a p p e a r from
t h e r e c o r d a s i t was s u b m i t t e d t o t h i s C o u r t , b u t what h a s
been made a p a r t of t h e r e c o r d p u r s u a n t t o s t i p u l a t i o n of
t h e p a r t i e s d u r i n g o r a l argument, i s t h a t a p r o c e e d i n g w a s
h e l d on ~ p r i 2 0 , 1977.
l A t t h a t t i m e T.E.R.'s mother a g r e e d
t o t h e s h e l t e r c a r e arrangement proposed by M s . Knopp, t o b e
implemented pending d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h i s matter by t h e
Youth C o u r t . Thus, t o p r e v e n t any p o s s i b l e embarrassment t o
T.E.R.'s p a r e n t s , t h e p a r t i e s t h e n proceeded p u r s u a n t t o t h e
s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g y o u t h s i n need of s u p e r v i s i o n
r a t h e r t h a n y o u t h s i n need of c a r e . I n i t i a l l y , t h i s had t h e
e f f e c t o f e s t a b l i s h i n g f o r t h e s t e p f a t h e r a prima f a c i e
showing o f d e n i a l o f due p r o c e s s . A t t h e May 4 h e a r i n g , he
had o n l y r e c e i v e d n o t i c e t h a t a l l e g a t i o n s had been made t h a t
T.E.R. w a s a y o u t h i n need o f s u p e r v i s i o n . The t r u e c o n c e r n
of t h e p a r t i e s , however, w a s t h a t T.E.R. m i g h t be a y o u t h i n
need of c a r e b e c a u s e o f s e x u a l a b u s e . Had t h e s t e p f a t h e r
n o t suffered a h e a r t a t t a c k during t h a t hearing, the S t a t e
may n o t have had a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o c u r e t h e a l l e g e d d e f e c t s
w i t h r e s p e c t t o due process p r i o r t o a f i n a l determination
by t h e Youth C o u r t . But s u b s e q u e n t t o t h a t h e a r i n g , t h e
s t e p f a t h e r had been a p p r i s e d of t h e t r u e n a t u r e of t h e
a l l e g a t i o n s i n v o l v e d i n t h e case. He was g i v e n t h e oppor-
t u n i t y t o t e s t i f y , and h e w a s r e p r e s e n t e d by c o u n s e l . In
a d d i t i o n , h e was a b l e t h r o u g h h i s c o u n s e l t o cross-examine
T.E.R. with respect t o her allegations. T h e r e f o r e , though
t h e p r o c e d u r e s i n v o l v e d i n t h i s c a s e w e r e h i g h l y u n u s u a l and
n o t condoned by t h i s C o u r t , w e f i n d t h a t T . E . R . ' s stepfather
was u l t i m a t e l y a f f o r d e d d u e p r o c e s s .
Beyond t h a t , however, something more s t a n d s o u t . These
proceedings focused p r i m a r i l y on a l l e g a t i o n s of improper
conduct on t h e p a r t of t h e s t e p f a t h e r . These a l l e g a t i o n s
were found t o be supported by a preponderance of t h e e v i -
dence, and t h e Youth Court was t h e r e f o r e c o r r e c t i n f i n d i n g
T.E.R.'s s t e p f a t h e r t o be "an u n f i t person t o have c u s t o d y ;
t h a t by r e a s o n of h i s dominance i n t h e f a m i l y t h e youth i s
unable t o avoid h i s abuse."
However, a c a r e f u l review of t h e r e c o r d does n o t r e v e a l
t h a t t h e Youth C o u r t a d e q u a t e l y c o n s i d e r e d t h e r i g h t s of
T.E.R.'s mother i n awarding permanent custody of T.E.R. to
SRS w i t h a u t h o r i t y t o c o n s e n t t o h e r a d o p t i o n . In addition
t o t h e i r r i g h t s as a c o u p l e , p a r e n t s may have i n d i v i d u a l
r i g h t s w i t h respect t o t h e i r children. The r e c o r d i n t h e
i n s t a n t c a s e r e v e a l s t h a t t h e m o t h e r ' s r i g h t s were a f f o r d e d
no more t h a n s u p e r f i c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Therefore, t h e
o r d e r of t h e Youth Court i s v a c a t e d t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t
applies t o T.E.R.'s mother, and t h e c a s e i s remanded t o t h e
Youth C o u r t f o r f u r t h e r proceedings t o determine t h e f u t u r e
s t a t u s of t h e m o t h e r ' s p a r e n t a l r i g h t s .
W concur:
e
U
7&',4, &&,,&&q
Chief J u s t i c e