DUI Lawyers Directory. Search for a dui lawyer near you. Operating a vehicle while drinking could cause judicial actions.
 Zip Code Search for DUI Lawyers
Defending Alleged Drunk Driving Criminal Acts Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Membership at DUI Defenders Discuss issues related to dui/dwi/owi Contact Us about a DUI Lawyer
facebook.com/MyDUI

  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

Walters v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

4/23/2003

because Ms. Walters' sole argument has not been preserved for our review.


At no time during any of the proceedings below did Ms. Walters assert any bias on the part of Judge Branton or move for the judge's recusal. For this reason, review of her argument is unnecessary. See Dodson v. Allstate Ins. Co., 345 Ark. 430, 47 S.W.3d 866 (2001).


It is not apparent that any other arguments are being raised in this appeal. However, to the extent that Ms. Walters may also be appealing based on the individual errors that allegedly occurred at the adjudication hearing, we note that Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure - Civil 2(c)(3)(A) provides that orders resulting from adjudication hearings are final appealable orders. Ms. Walters' failure to appeal from the final, appealable adjudication order deprives this court of jurisdiction to address any assignments of error pertaining to the adjudication hearing. See Moore v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., 69 Ark. App. 1, 9 S.W.3d 531 (2000).


It is also evident that no error occurred during the termination hearing regarding the separate errors asserted by Ms. Walters. While the trial court did indicate that custody could not be returned to Ms. Walters while she was incarcerated, this was a true statement; the trial court did not state that it was bound to terminate parental rights based on her incarceration, but rather examined all of the evidence before reaching its decision. As to the trial court's consideration of the facts contained in the orders in the previous termination case, the record does not reflect that any objection to such consideration was made during the termination hearing. Moreover, Ms. Walters has cited no authority nor made any convincing argument on this point, and this is another reason that we need not address the issue. See Smith-Blair, Inc. v. Jones, 77 Ark. App. 273, 72 S.W.3d 560 (2002).


Affirmed.


Stroud, C.J., and Crabtree, J., agree.






Page 1 2 3 4 

Arkansas DUI Attorneys    DUI Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

DUI Driving Defined Highway Defined
Under Influence Defined DUI/3 Strikes DUI & Manslaughter
DUI & Murder DUI Punishment Sobriety Checkpoints
DMV's Role in DUI Revocation vs. Suspension Field Sobriety Testing
Speed Measurement Prior DUI Convictions Drawing Blood & Consent
Refusal to Test DUI Lawyers Testimonials by Member DUI Lawyers
DUI Articles Ignition Interlock Implied Consent
Summary DUI License Suspension In-home Arrest Vehicle Defined
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites  |  Draeger FAQ
SiteMap | DUI Blog | DUI Lawyers | DUI Attorneys | Trading Partners | Member Agreement | Terms of Service
Attorneys Click Here | DUI Case Laws | FAQ | DUI Forum | Directory of DUI Attorneys | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2004. “DUI Defenders”. All rights reserved.