No. 23-6215

D. E. v. Russell County Department of Human Resources

Lower Court: Alabama
Docketed: 2023-12-11
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: biological-parent child-custody clear-and-convincing-evidence dependency-proceedings due-process ore-tenus-rule parental-rights substantive-due-process
Key Terms:
DueProcess CriminalProcedure JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-02-16 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the State violates the Due Process Clause when it assumes initial custody of a child from an involved biological parent utilizing dependency proceedings that exclude parental fitness as a factor in the decision

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED ; —_——*_-‘Whether the State violates the Due Process Clause when it assumes initial custody of a child from an involved biological parent utilizing dependency proceedings that exclude parental fitness as a factor in the decision. Whether the application of the ore tenus rule in appellate review of judgments depriving a parent of the custody, control and care of a child in favor of a non-parent adequately and fairly protects the rights of parents to control the upbringing of their children from erroneous deprivation under the Due Process Clause. Ha 5 7 y il

Docket Entries

2024-02-20
Petition DENIED.
2024-01-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2023-12-11
Motion (23M39) for leave to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the supplemental appendix under seal Granted.
2023-11-21
MOTION (23M39) DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/8/2023.
2023-09-07
Motion (23M39) for leave to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the supplemental appendix under seal filed.
2023-09-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 10, 2024)

Attorneys

D. E.
Dammuon Epps — Petitioner
Dammuon Epps — Petitioner