DIVISIONS I and IV
This appeal is governed by the new rules promulgated by our supreme court in a
1
per curiam opinion handed down on May 18, 2006. The rules, effective July 1, 2006,
provide for an expedited process within which appeals from dependency-neglect cases are
heard.
LEONA MERIWEATHER
APPELLANT
V.
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
APPELLEE
CA 06-955
APRIL 11, 2007
APPEAL FROM THE WHITE
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. JV-05-73]
HONORABLE ROBERT EDWARDS,
JUDGE
AFFIRMED
JOHN B. ROBBINS, Judge
Appellant Leona Meriweather appeals the termination of her parental rights to her
daughter SM, as found by the White County Circuit Court. SM was born in March 2005,
and she was removed from appellant’s custody in April 2005. The order terminating parental
rights was entered on July 26, 2006, from which she filed a timely notice of appeal.1
Appellant argues that the trial court clearly erred in terminating her parental rights
because she undisputedly completed the requirements of her case plan, and because her low
intellectual functioning was not a sufficient basis upon which to terminate her parental rights.
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the child’s attorney ad litem
-2-
have filed a combined brief in opposition to appellant’s arguments on appeal, asserting that
there is no reversible error. We affirm.
The history of this case is as follows. SM came into custody as a one-month-old when
she was treated at a hospital for a spiral fracture to her left humerus and there was an adult-
sized-hand-shaped bruise on her right thigh. Appellant was the child’s sole care giver and
offered no explanation for the injuries. After being removed from her mother’s care, SM
thrived in foster care. She was developing appropriately for a child just over one year old, and
the DHHS case worker testified that it was highly likely she would be adopted if cleared for
such a plan. SM had no special needs.
The concern was that appellant needed intensive and constant supervision and
instruction in h