Jeffery Stanfield v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children

── Jeffery Stanfield v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas Date: March 11, 2026 Category: General Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 180 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CV-25-579 Opinion Delivered March 11, 2026 JEFFERY STANFIELD APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE SHARP COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NO. 68JV-24-37] ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN HONORABLE ADAM G. WEEKS, SERVICES AND MINOR CHILDREN JUDGE APPELLEES AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED MIKE MURPHY, Judge Appellant Jeffery Stanfield appeals the termination of his parental rights to his children MC1 and MC2, who were ages one and nine months, respectively, when they entered the custody of the Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS). Pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Rule 6-9(j) of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, Stanfield’s counsel filed a no-merit brief and a motion to withdraw asserting there are no issues of arguable merit to raise on appeal. The clerk of this court provided Stanfield with a copy of his counsel’s brief and notified him of his right to file a pro se statement of points for reversal. Stanfield filed points for reversal. We affirm the termination of Stanfield’s parental rights and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.  DHS received a call about Stanfield’s family in August 2023 when DHS received a Garrett’s Law report that MC2 was born with illegal drugs in his system. MC2’s mother, Amanda (who is not part of her case), and Stanfield had been using methamphetamine and marijuana. A protective-services case was opened, and the family began receiving services. On April 9, 2024, DHS petitioned the court for dependency-neglect, alleging that it had received information that Standfield had been arrested for domestic battery and endangering the welfare of a minor, and Amanda had tested positive for methamphetamine and other substances. DHS did not seek immediate custody. A hearing on the petition was held on May 14, 2024, and the children were adjudicated dependent-neglected due to parental unfitness because of Amanda’s drug use. Jeffery also was found to be unfit because a no-contact order in a criminal case prevented him from having contact with Amanda or the children. DHS took custody of the children, and the goal of the case was reunification. The next month Stanfield was found to be the children’s father. He was mostly compliant with the case plan and was awarded four hours of visitation each week. On February 7, 2025, DHS filed a petition to terminate Stanfield’s parental rights, alleging that he was not fit to parent the children because he did not have housing appropriate for the children, he had failed to complete services, he had ongoing criminal charges that resulted in the loss of his driver’s license and vehicle, and he had not demonstrated the skills necessary to be the sole caretaker for the children. As to grounds, DHS pleaded that he had failed to remedy issues that prevented placement with him and 2 that aggravated circumstances existed because there were no other services that could be offered that would make reunification likely. A hearing on DHS’s petition was held on June 17, 2025; at that hearing, the court heard the following evidence. Stacy Sutton, a DHS program assistant, testified to two visits Stanfield had with his children. Her testimony was that on one visit, he did not bring an appropriate lunch for the children (beef jerky, pepperoni slices, and Cheetos); the one-year-old choked on the beef jerky. She fu