FAMILY LAW
Natalie Howard
In Angelica C. v. Jonathan C., the supreme court held it was legal error to ignore the father’s sexual abuse of the mother when analyzing factors to determine best interests of the child in awarding custody. Jonathan pleaded guilty to attempted sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree after sexually abusing and impregnating Angelica when she was only thirteen. Their son was born while Jonathan was incarcerated in 2010. Later, Jonathan sought full custody of the child. In considering Jonathan’s motion, the superior court recognized Jonathan’s history of domestic violence evidenced by his prior conviction, but ruled that it only formed a rebuttable presumption of ineligibility for custody. The court then conducted a factor-by-factor best interests analysis and, finding all factors either favored Jonathan or were neutral, granted him sole custody. On appeal, the supreme court concluded the superior court committed legal error by failing to account for the “defining fact” of the case—Jonathan’s sexual abuse of Angelica—in its weighing of two statutory factors. The superior court should have considered the underlying fact of sexual abuse and therefore excluded all evidence of Angelica and her parents’ unwillingness to foster a relationship between Jonathan and the child. Additionally, when weighing the domestic violence factor, the court made findings on the absence of domestic violence in the respective homes of the parents, but incorrectly ignored Jonathan’s abuse of Angelica. Thus, the supreme court held it was legal error for the lower court to fail to consider the father’s sexual abuse of the mother when conducting a best interests analysis for awarding custody.
