Glen Collins II v. Jessica Collins

── Glen Collins II v. Jessica Collins ── Court: Alaska Supreme Court Date: May 27, 2026 Category: General NOTICE Memorandum decisions of this court do not create legal precedent. A party wishing to cite such a decision in a brief or at oral argument should review Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d). THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA GLEN COLLINS II, ) ) Supreme Court No. S-19392 Appellant, ) ) Superior Court No. 3AN-24-04154 CI v. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION JESSICA COLLINS, ) AND JUDGMENT* ) Appellee. ) No. 2149 – May 27, 2026 ) Appeal from the Superior Court of the State of Alaska, Third Judicial District, Anchorage, Yvonne Lamoureux, Judge. Appearances: Glen Collins II, pro se, Eagle River, Appellant. Notice of nonparticipation filed by Jessica Collins, pro se, Palmer, Appellee. Before: Carney, Chief Justice, and Borghesan, Henderson, Pate, and Oravec, Justices. INTRODUCTION A father and mother entered a settlement agreement, adopted by the superior court, which provided for joint legal and physical custody of their three minor children. Seven months after entering the settlement agreement, the father moved to modify custody, alleging that the children’s emotional state called for a change in the custody arrangement. The superior court denied the motion, reasoning that the father * Entered under Alaska Appellate Rule 214. had not shown a substantial change in circumstances. The father appeals. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the denial of the motion to modify custody. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS A. Facts Glen Collins II and Jessica Collins married in 2002. They separated in November 2023 and divorced in April 2024. Glen and Jessica had four children, including three teenagers that were still minors at the time of divorce and one adult daughter. The custody arrangement concerns the minor children. In April 2024, in anticipation of an interim custody order, a court system custody investigator conducted interviews with all three children. The daughters both expressed in their interviews that they wanted to live with their father, have no contact with their mother, and for their father to have all legal power. The son also expressed wanting to live with his father and stated that he wanted no contact with his mother “until she stops arguing, stops kicking them out, stops degrading them and admits she was wrong.” The investigator raised concerns that the children were coached before the interviews. The investigator also noted that “[t]he young adults appear hostile and unforgiving to [Jessica]. Their preferences should carry minimal weight.” The investigator provided this report to both parties and the superior court. The parties did not obtain an interim custody order. Instead, two weeks after the children’s interviews, Glen and Jessica entered into a formal written settlement agreement. Relevant to this appeal, the settlement agreement provided that Glen and Jessica would share physical custody of the children through a week-on/week-off schedule. The agreement further provided that the parties would have joint legal custody. The agreement also contained a provision that the “custody . . . order[] [is] in the best interest of the [c]hildren.” Both Glen and Jessica signed affidavits that they understood and agreed to the terms of the settlement agreement. Though there had been no interim custody order, the children were living with Glen before