Court of Appeals Digest: Oct. 14, 2019.

Byline: admin

Civil Unpublished

Civil Commitment

SDP; Stipulations

Appellant, pro se, challenged the District Court's denial of appellant's motion to withdraw his stipulation to commitment to the Minnesota Sex Offender Program as a sexually dangerous person, arguing that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel and entitled to an evidentiary hearing and to withdrawal under Minn. R. Crim. P. 20.01, subd. 6. The Court of Appeals concluded that appellant's motion to withdraw, filed four years after his commitment was made indeterminate, was untimely, that he failed to show that his counsel was ineffective, that he was not entitled to an evidentiary hearing, and that Minn. R. Crim. P. 20.01, subd. 6, did not apply to stipulation withdrawal. Affirmed.

A18-2128 In re Civil Commitment of Sleen (Otter Tail County)

Domestic Relations

Child Protection; Termination of Parental Rights

Appellant challenged the District Court's termination of her parental rights to her child. She argued that the District Court erred in concluding that she failed to rebut the statutory presumption that she was palpably unfit to be a party to the parent and child relationship and abused its discretion in determining that termination of her parental rights was in the child's best interests. The Court of Appeals concluded that mother did not present evidence that could justify a finding that she was suitable to be entrusted with the care of the child and that the best-interests finding was not an abuse of discretion. Affirmed.

A19-0780 In re Welfare of Child of J.D. (Ramsey County)

Domestic Relations

Child Protection; Termination of Parental Rights

Appellant mother challenged the District Court's termination of her parental rights, arguing that the record did not support the District Court's findings and determination that she failed to satisfy the duties of the parent-child relationship and that respondent county failed to make reasonable efforts to correct the conditions leading to the child's out-of-home placement. Noting evidence of appellant's methamphetamine use and that the two-year-old child was at one point playing with a loaded gun while appellant was passed out on a couch, the Court of Appeals concluded that the District Court's conclusion that appellant substantially neglected the child was supported by evidence provided. Affirmed.

A19-0904 In re Welfare of Child of L.M.D. (Becker County)

Domestic Relations

Dissolution; Spousal Maintenance

The District Court dissolved respondent and appellant's marriage, awarded respondent permanent spousal maintenance, classified one of...