In RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.L.

── In RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.L. ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: April 24, 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 UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.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 A.L., J.L., R.L., T.L., and M.L. No. 1 CA-JV 25-0143 FILED 04-24-2026 Appeal from the Superior Court in Mohave County No. L8015JD202107026 The Honorable Aaron Michael Demke, Commissioner AFFIRMED COUNSEL Robert Rosanelli Attorney at Law, Phoenix By Robert Rosanelli Advisory Counsel for Appellant Adam L., Aberdeen, Washington Appellant Pro Se Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Tucson By Tori M. Valdez, Marika J. Hodge Counsel for Appellee DCS Mohave County Legal Advocate, Kingman By Christopher Giles Counsel for Appellee Children  IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.L., et al. Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Judge Anni Hill Foster delivered the decision of the Court, in which Presiding Judge David B. Gass and Chief Judge Randall M. Howe joined. F O S T E R, Judge: ¶1 Father, Adam L., appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights to his five children. He claims the termination violates his due process rights to a fundamental liberty interest. This Court affirms. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶2 In 2021, police investigated a report that Father physically and sexually abused two of his children.1 During a police interview, Father admitted the allegations. Police charged him with rape of a child, child molestation, assault and incest. Father pled guilty to four counts of rape of a child in the first degree and four counts of incest in the first degree. A court sentenced him to 20 years to life in prison. ¶3 Because of Father’s criminal convictions and sentence, the Arizona Department of Child Safety2 sought a court order declaring all five children dependent as to Father. It alleged that Father sexually abused one of the children and could not properly care for any of them because of domestic violence, substance abuse and incarceration. Father entered a no- contest plea to the dependency, and the juvenile court found the children dependent for the reasons alleged. ¶4 As the dependency case progressed, Father asked the Department for visitation with the children. The Department understood 1 At the time of his arrest, Father, Cassandra C., (“Mother”) and the children lived in Washington State. 2 After Father’s arrest, Mother fled to Arizona with the children while under an order not to do so. Washington transferred its dependency case to Arizona. Mother is not part of this appeal. 2  IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.L., et al. Decision of the Court that the terms of Father’s sentence prohibited him from contact with the children, but the Department allowed him to provide documentation on the terms of his sentence to determine the feasibility of his request. Around this time, the Department changed Father’s case plan from family reunification to termination based on the nature of his crimes and the children’s best interests. ¶5 Several months later, the Department petitioned to terminate Father’s parental rights on the grounds of willful abuse, A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(2), and nature of felony, A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(4). After initially contesting the termination petition, Father pled no contest. ¶6 The court held an evidentiary hearing on the termination. It heard the Department’s testimony and accepted its evidence. Counsel represented Father