2017 Ohio 9178
Oh. Ct. App. 8th Dist. Cuyahog...2017Background
- Child A.M.R. (born 1/14/2006) was subject to ongoing custody proceedings between Mother and Father; parents had a prior shared parenting plan that Father sought to terminate.
- Trial resumed January 2017; the court conducted an in camera interview of A.M.R. on January 11, 2017. Child’s counsel was absent due to injury but had consented to the interview being held without her present.
- Child’s counsel later requested the transcript/recording of the in camera interview to effectively represent the child; Mother opposed, citing R.C. 3109.04(B)(3) and due process concerns.
- The juvenile court denied counsel’s request for the transcript; child’s counsel appealed. The appellate court initially dismissed for lack of a final order, then reinstated the appeal as final under R.C. 2505.02(B)(2).
- The appellate court reviewed statutory text, legislative purpose, and case law distinguishing parents’ access from a child’s attorney’s access to the record of an in camera interview.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether child’s counsel is entitled to the transcript/recording of the R.C. 3109.04 in camera interview conducted without counsel present | Counsel for A.M.R.: transcript is necessary for effective representation and does not conflict with R.C. 3109.04 since counsel has statutory right to attend interviews | Mother: R.C. 3109.04(B)(3) bars release of written/recorded statements; allowing access would defeat statute’s protection of child candor and implicate due process/equal protection | Reversed: under these facts the statute does not preclude the child’s attorney from obtaining the transcript; denying access prejudiced the child’s right to effective counsel |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Markham, 70 Ohio App.3d 841 (discussing requirement that a record be made of in camera child interviews)
- Myers v. Myers, 170 Ohio App.3d 436 (Ohio App. 2007) (interpreting R.C. 3109.04(B) as precluding parents from accessing transcripts to protect candor)
- Willis v. Willis, 149 Ohio App.3d 50 (Ohio App. 2002) (holding parental access to interview transcript would chill child’s candor)
- Inscoe v. Inscoe, 121 Ohio App.3d 396 (Ohio App. 1997) (contrasting view that parents may have access to the transcript)