In Re Term of Parental Rights as to C.C.

── In Re Term of Parental Rights as to C.C. ── Case No.: 1 CA-JV 25-0039 Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: October 20, 2026 Category: General NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE IN RE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO C.C. No. 1 CA-JV 25-0039 FILED 10-20-2025 Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. JD41469 The Honorable Pamela S. Gates, Judge AFFIRMED APPEARANCES Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Tucson By Markia J. Hodge Counsel for Appellee, Department of Child Safety Maricopa County Legal Advocate’s Office, Phoenix By Amanda L. Adams Counsel for Child E.C., Phoenix Pro Se David W. Bell, Attorney at Law, Mesa By David W. Bell Advisory Counsel for Appellant  IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO C.C. Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge David B. Gass delivered the decision of the court, in which Judge Michael J. Brown and Judge Andrew J. Becke joined. G A S S, Judge: ¶1 Father appeals the superior court’s order terminating his parental rights to child on the grounds of chronic substance abuse. Father argues the superior court violated his due process rights because the Department of Child Safety suppressed a March 2024 police report and he did not receive notice of what he says was a continued termination adjudication held on February 6, 2025. Father does not challenge the grounds for termination. ¶2 The Department introduced and the superior court admitted the March 2024 police report into evidence at the adjudication. Father was present at the February 5, 2025 adjudication. And the adjudication did not continue on February 6, 2025. The court thus affirms. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶3 The case begins with an earlier dependency. Child’s maternal aunt filed a private dependency petition alleging mother and father were unable to parent because of substance abuse, and domestic violence. After investigation, the Department took legal custody of the child and had the aunt remain the child’s placement. Around 3 months later, the superior court adjudicated child dependent as to mother and father. ¶4 During the first dependency, father minimally engaged in court-ordered services and failed to engage in any treatment. Father took just 8 drug tests, some of which were positive for alcohol and marijuana. Father also did not provide proof of housing or employment. During the same time, mother completed a treatment program, attended domestic- violence counseling, and drug tested regularly. Mother’s drug tests showed she maintained her sobriety during that time. ¶5 Around 15 months into the first dependency, the superior court placed the child with mother, ordered father to have weekly supervised visits, and dismissed the dependency. 2  IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO C.C. Decision of the Court ¶6 Around 9 months later, mother died. She and the child were living with the aunt when mother died, so the child remained with the aunt. Two weeks after mother’s death, father showed up at the aunt’s house demanding the aunt give him the child. When the aunt did not, father called the police alleging the aunt was denying him custody of the child and wanted to press charges. The police went to the aunt’s house, determined father did not have legal custody, and took no further action. ¶7 A few weeks later, the aunt filed a second private dependency petition alleging father had been absent, continued to us