Winnebago County Department of Human Services v. C.R.Q., II,, 2024AP81, 4/17/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In a fact-dependent TPR appeal, “Craig” attacks the circuit court’s discretionary ruling on multiple fronts but fails due to the imposing standard of review.
This is a relatively long and factually quite dense opinion. It would appear that appellate counsel for “Craig Quentin” has exhaustively combed through the circuit court’s reasoning in support of the TPR order and identified a battery of conflicting and inconsistent evidence to rebut, point-by-point, the court’s oral ruling.
That work, however, is all for naught. Although COA expends significant effort in engaging with the substantive arguments, it ultimately holds that, “At bottom, Quentin’s appeal asks us to second-guess the circuit court, reweigh the evidence in a manner similar to how he weighs it, and consider the statutory factors anew.” (¶25). COA reminds the reader, however, that its review is considerably more circumscribed as its task is simply to search the record for reasons to affirm. (Id.). COA is satisfied there is adequate record evidence to support the termination order and therefore affirms. (¶26).
