State v. Robert T., 2012AP1110, District 1, 8/28/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
¶11 Robert argues that because an adoptive resource was not in place for Anthony at the time of the dispositional hearing, the trial court essentially left Anthony without a family and did not make a finding in Anthony’s best interest. Effectually, Robert argues that the trial court did not properly consider the factors set forth in Wis. Stat. § 48.426(3). We disagree.
¶12 The trial court’s findings support its determination that each of the factors in Wis. Stat. § 48.426(3) weighed in favor of terminating Robert’s parental rights. …
…
¶18 Robert contends that the trial court was not bound solely by the factors provided by Wis. Stat. § 48.426(3), and should have considered that “the result of this litigation is that Anthony has been left with no family at all.” We do not take a stand on Robert’s assertion that “[a]n imperfect family is better than no family.” Instead we conclude that the trial court applied the proper standard of law to the facts before it and that facts in the record support the trial court’s determination. Therefore, the trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in terminating Robert’s parental rights to Anthony.
