Christopher Crawford v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children

── Christopher Crawford v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas Date: May 20, 2026 Category: General Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 319 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. CV-26-8 CHRISTOPHER CRAWFORD Opinion Delivered May 20, 2026 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, EIGHTH V. DIVISION [NO. 60JV-24-402] ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND MINOR HONORABLE TJUANA BYRD CHILDREN MANNING, JUDGE APPELLEES AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Judge Appellant Christopher Crawford appeals the Pulaski County Circuit Court’s termination of his parental rights of his eight minor children. His counsel filed a motion to withdraw and no-merit brief pursuant to Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 359 Ark. 131, 194 S.W.3d 739 (2004), and Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6- 9(j) (2025), asserting that there is no arguable claim to raise on appeal. The clerk of this court sent a copy of the brief and motion to be relieved to Christopher, informing him that he had the right to file pro se points for reversal under Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-9(j)(3), which he has filed. We affirm the order terminating Christopher’s parental rights and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.  I. Background Facts This case involves the eight minor children of Sydney Crawford and Christopher Crawford. On May 6, 2024, the Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS) filed a petition for ex parte emergency custody and dependency-neglect pertaining to all of the minor children. DHS alleged that the children were dependent-neglected as a result of neglect, abuse, sexual abuse, and parental unfitness. An ex parte order for emergency custody was filed the same day. A probable-cause hearing was held on May 9, and the circuit court accepted the stipulation of the parties that probable cause existed at the time of removal. The circuit court ordered a “minimum of six hours of family time with the children” and that the children should be lice-free prior to such family time. The circuit court also prohibited the use of corporal punishment or physical discipline of the children during family visitation. On June 24, 2024, the circuit court entered a finding that the children were dependent-neglected on the basis of environmental neglect and educational neglect. The court noted that Sydney Crawford was currently incarcerated. A disposition hearing was held on July 9. MC1 and MC4 were placed together, MC3 and MC8 were placed together, and the other four minor children were in separate placements. The court found that the goal was reunification with a fit parent and a concurrent goal of adoption or guardianship. Visitation was to remain as previously ordered; however, the court gave DHS discretion to modify and increase Christopher’s visitation to unsupervised upon agreement of the attorney ad litem. 2  A review hearing was held on December 12. The court entered its order finding that Christopher needed to complete his services; have safe, stable, and appropriate housing and income; remain sober; and demonstrate that he can provide care and supervision of the minor children. The court found that Christopher had partially complied with the case plan and court order. On April 24, 2025, the court held a permanency-planning hearing. After the hearing, the circuit court changed the goal of the case to adoption and authorized DHS to file a termination-of-parental-rights petition. The court found