In re Adoption of A.M.H., 2023 IL App (1st) 220357-U

1. Case citation and parties
- In re Adoption of A.M.H., 2023 IL App (1st) 220357-U (Apr. 13, 2023) (Rule 23 order; non‑precedential).
- Petitioners/Appellees: Danny K. Sizemore, Jr. & Asia V. Sizemore (maternal aunt and husband; guardians/adoptive petitioners).
- Respondent/Appellant: Alexis Olivia Brown (mother, pro se).

2. Key legal issues
- Whether the trial court’s finding that the mother was an unfit parent was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Whether the mother’s conviction for aggravated battery of a child established depravity under the Adoption Act and whether she overcame the statutory presumption of depravity.
- Procedural: effect of an incomplete record on appellate review.

3. Holding/outcome
- Affirmed. The appellate court held the trial court’s finding of parental unfitness was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

4. Significant legal reasoning
- Standard of review: parental unfitness must be proven by clear and convincing evidence; appellate courts defer to trial court credibility and factual findings and will not disturb a fitness finding unless against the manifest weight of the evidence.
- Procedural posture: appellant failed to provide a transcript/report of the fitness hearing (nor an agreed statement), so under Foutch v. O’Bryant the record is incomplete and appellate courts must presume the trial court’s ruling conformed to law and was supported by evidence.
- Merits in the record: (a) failure to maintain reasonable degree of interest/concern/responsibility (750 ILCS 50/1(D)(b)) — GAL report and appellant’s interrogatory answers showed no contact, no financial support, no participation in major decisions while child resided with petitioners; (b) depravity (750 ILCS 50/1(D)(i)) — certified conviction for aggravated battery of a child under 13 creates a statutory presumption of depravity that can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence; appellant produced no such evidence. The court therefore reasonably found unfitness on both grounds.

5. Practice implications
- Preservation and record: appellants (especially pro se litigants) must ensure the reporter’s transcript, agreed statement, or bystander’s report is in the record; absence is fatal to appellate attack on factual rulings.
- Strategic pleadings: reliance on convictions under 750 ILCS 50/1(D)(i) creates a strong presumption of depravity; if opposing, prepare clear, convincing evidence to rebut.
- Use of GAL reports and discovery admissions: GAL findings and interrogatory/admissions can materially support unfitness findings; counsel should aggressively develop and challenge those records at trial.
- Guardianship/adoption planning: petitioners can pursue both unfitness and best‑interests routes; once unfitness is established, consent issues and termination of parental rights proceed with deference to trial court factfinding.