Background
The Jefferson County Division of Children, Youth and Families received a report alleging that J.I., Sr. had sexually assaulted A.G., his partner’s daughter from a prior relationship, and that the child’s mother had physically abused A.G. and two other children. All five children initially remained in the parents’ home under the Division’s protective supervision.
At an adjudicatory jury trial, evidence showed that J.I., who was almost four, was nonverbal and communicated by screaming, grunting, or biting. Professionals had requested a developmental assessment, which they considered essential to identify and provide needed services, but the parents had not consented to or arranged one by the time of trial. The jury found that J.I. lacked proper parental care through father’s acts or omissions, and the juvenile court adjudicated the child dependent or neglected as to father.
The Court’s Holding
The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. Viewing the evidence and reasonable inferences in the Division’s favor, the court concluded that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding under section 19-3-102(1)(b), C.R.S. 2025.
The court emphasized testimony that the child had serious communication difficulties, that a nonverbal four-year-old was particularly vulnerable in a home involving founded sexual-abuse allegations and other abuse concerns, and that father had not secured the requested developmental assessment. Expert testimony supported an inference that refusing an assessment for a child with those needs could demonstrate an inability to meet the child’s needs and a lack of protective capacity. Father’s reliance on an unverified handwritten note purportedly stating that the pediatrician found no delays did not require a different result.
Key Takeaways
- A dependency-and-neglect adjudication may rest on a parent’s failure to obtain an essential developmental assessment for a child with substantial communication needs.
- On sufficiency review, the appellate court views the record and reasonable inferences in favor of the prevailing party and does not reweigh the jury’s credibility determinations.
- Unverified evidence purportedly reflecting a pediatrician’s opinion did not undermine the jury’s supported finding.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates how a parent’s failure to address a young child’s identified developmental and communication needs can support an adjudication for lack of proper parental care. It also underscores the heightened protective concerns when a child cannot readily communicate possible abuse or neglect.