In Re: K.H.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

Electronically Filed
Intermediate Court of Appeals
CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX
07-NOV-2024
08:08 AM
Dkt. 77 SO

NO. CAAP-XX-XXXXXXX

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

IN THE INTEREST OF K.H.

APPEAL FROM THE FAMILY COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT
(CASE NO. FC-S No. 20-00182)

SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
(By: Hiraoka, Presiding Judge, Nakasone and McCullen, JJ.)

S.K. (Mother) appeals from the March 12, 2024 Order
Terminating Parental Rights entered by the Family Court of the
First Circuit.1 We affirm.
Child was born in 2019. Mother and A.H. (Father) are
Child's biological parents. On November 12, 2020, the Hawai#i
Department of Human Services (DHS) petitioned to place Child and
four of Child's half-siblings in temporary foster custody. A
guardian ad litem (GAL) was appointed. An order granting the
petition was entered on November 18, 2020. Child's date of entry
into foster care was January 7, 2021.
DHS prepared an initial Safe Family Home Report and
Family Service Plan on November 12, 2020. The goal was for Child
to remain in the family without the need for DHS or family court
assistance. Mother was to complete a psychological evaluation

1
The Honorable Rebecca A. Copeland presided.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

and substance abuse assessment, take part in sexual abuse
education and group therapy, complete parenting classes, and
cooperate and work with DHS. Mother was informed that her
failure to provide a safe family home within two years from the
date of Child's entry into foster care may result in her parental
rights being terminated.
DHS prepared eight more Safe Family Home Reports and
Family Service Plans. The GAL prepared ten reports. After a
January 12, 2023 review hearing (over two years after Child
entered foster care), the family court ordered DHS to move to
terminate parental rights. DHS prepared a Permanent Plan on
May 16, 2023. The goal was for Child to be adopted by Child's
resource caregivers. DHS moved to terminate Mother's parental
rights on May 22, 2023.
A trial was held on March 11, 2024. The Order
Terminating Parental Rights was entered on March 12, 2024.
Mother appealed. The family court entered findings of fact (FOF)
and conclusions of law (COL) on April 17, 2024, consistent with
Hawai#i Family Court Rule 52.
Mother contends there was insufficient evidence to
support the family court's ruling that she "is not presently nor
in the reasonably foreseeable future, be [sic] willing and able
to provide the Child with a safe family home, even with the
assistance of a service plan to warrant the termination of his
[sic] parental rights[.]" She challenges FOF nos. 71-73, 100,
110, 118, 122-130, and 133-138, and COL nos. 24-27.
The family court may terminate parental rights in a
child under age 14 if there is clear and convincing evidence that
the parent (1) is not presently willing and able to provide the
child with a safe family home, even with the assistance of a
service plan; (2) it is not reasonably foreseeable that the
parent will become willing and able to provide the child with a
safe family home, even with the assistance of a service plan,
within a reasonable time, which shall not exceed two years from
the child's date of entry into foster care; and (3) the proposed

2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

permanent plan is in the best interests of the child. Hawaii
Revised Statutes § 587A-33 (2018).
The family court has wide discretion in deciding
termination of parental rights cases, and its decision will not
be set aside unless there was a "manifest abuse of discretion."
In re Doe, 95 Hawai#i 183, 189, 20 P.3d 616, 622 (2001). Its
findings of fact are reviewed under the clearly erroneous
standard. Id. at 190, 20 P.3d at 623. Its conclusions of law
are reviewed de novo under the right/wrong standard. Id. Its
determinations about whether a parent is willing and able to
provide a safe family home for their child, and whether it is
reasonably foreseeable that a parent will become willing and able
to provide a safe family home within a reasonable time, present
mixed questions of law and fact reviewed under the clearly
erroneous standard. Id. Its determination of what is or is not
in a child's best interests is also reviewed for clear error.
Id. "[T]he family court is given much leeway in its examination
of the reports concerning a child's care, custody, and welfare,
and its conclusions in this regard, if supported by the record
and not clearly erroneous, must stand on appeal." Id. (cleaned
up).
During the trial the family court took judicial notice
of DHS's and the GAL's reports. The court heard testimony from
Mother, the GAL, marriage family therapist Tiffany Tanaka, and
DHS social worker Renee San Nicolas. Mother challenges FOF
no. 138, finding San Nicolas's expert testimony to be credible.
The family court also found, and Mother does not challenge:

139. The expert testimony of Tiffany Tanaka is
credible.

140. The testimony of Mother, unless otherwise stated
above, is not credible. Even if credible, the court gives
no or minimal weight to her testimony, unless otherwise
stated above.

"It is well-settled that an appellate court will not
pass upon issues dependent upon the credibility of witnesses and

3
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

the weight of the evidence; this is the province of the trier of
fact." In re Doe, 95 Hawai#i at 190, 20 P.3d at 623. We have
carefully reviewed the evidence considered by the family court.
The findings of fact challenged by Mother are supported by
substantial evidence in the record, and are not clearly
erroneous. The conclusions of law challenged by Mother are
right. The mixed findings and conclusions that: (1) Mother is
not presently willing or able to provide Child with a safe family
home, even with the assistance of a service plan; (2) it is not
reasonably foreseeable that Mother will become willing and able
to provide Child with a safe family home, even with the
assistance of a service plan, within a reasonable time not to
exceed two years from Child's date of entry into foster care; and
(3) the Permanent Plan is in Child's best interests, were not
clearly erroneous.
The family court's March 12, 2024 Order Terminating
Parental Rights is affirmed.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, November 7, 2024.

On the briefs:
/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka
Tae Chin Kim, Presiding Judge
for Respondent-Appellant
Mother. /s/ Karen T. Nakasone
Associate Judge
Kurt J. Shimamoto,
Julio C. Herrera, /s/ Sonja M.P. McCullen
Abigail D. Apana, Associate Judge
for Petitioner-Appellee
Department of Human Services.

4