In Re Term of Parental Rights as to Z.B.

── In Re Term of Parental Rights as to Z.B. ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: April 22, 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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 Z.B. No. 1 CA-JV 25-0125 FILED 04-22-2026 Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. JD42638 The Honorable Pamela S. Gates, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Czop Law Firm PLLC, Queen Creek By Steven Czop Counsel for Appellant Father Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix By Ingeet Pandya Counsel for Appellee Department of Child Safety Maricopa County Office of the Legal Advocate, Phoenix By Amanda Adams Counsel for Appellee Child  IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO Z.B. Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge James B. Morse Jr. delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge Andrew M. Jacobs and Judge Brian Y. Furuya joined. M O R S E , Judge: ¶1 Malik B. ("Father") appeals the termination of his parental rights to Z.B. ("Child"). We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶2 Father and Keyanna N. ("Mother") are the parents of Child, born in May 2024.1 ¶3 In January 2023, Father's older child, K.B., was born substance-exposed to fentanyl. Upon petition by the Department of Child Safety ("DCS"), the juvenile court deemed K.B. dependent due to Father's substance abuse and incarceration. DCS provided Father with reunification services including substance-abuse treatment, drug testing, parenting classes, and supervised visitation, but he did not participate in drug testing or any substance-abuse services. ¶4 One year later, the juvenile court changed K.B.'s case plan to severance and adoption, and DCS moved to terminate Father's parental rights based on both the substance-abuse and the six-months' time-in-care grounds. See A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(3) and (8)(b). In April 2024, Father pled no contest, and the court granted the motion on both grounds. ¶5 In May 2024, Child was also born substance-exposed to fentanyl. Father was present at Child's birth. Child remained hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit for over a month suffering from withdrawal symptoms, but Father never visited Child. Upon Child's discharge from the hospital in June 2024, DCS took temporary custody of Child and petitioned for dependency. For the next several months, Father did not request services, test for drugs, or seek to visit Child. ¶6 In October 2024, Father was arrested for fleeing from the police. DCS's case manager located him in jail later that month and 1 Mother is not a party to this appeal. 2  IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO Z.B. Decision of the Court arranged for him to have a telephonic visit with Child. Father disclosed he was receiving suboxone in jail to treat his opioid addiction. He was transferred to prison the following month with an early release date in two years. ¶7 In December 2024, Father pled no contest to the dependency petition. The court set a family-reunification case plan and directed DCS to communicate with Father's corrections officer to arrange visits and any substance-abuse or parenting classes available to him while incarcerated. ¶8 The case manager attempted to coordinate services with Father's corrections officers. She arranged virtual visits in prison between Father and Child, although visits in May and June 2025 were canceled because DCS did not have a visit su