In Re: Adoption of: M.L.M., minor, Appeal of: T.R.
1009 WDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Dec 18, 2017Background
- Mother filed a petition to involuntarily terminate Father’s parental rights and a simultaneous petition to allow Stepfather to adopt the child (born Oct. 2009). Hearing originally set for April 3, 2017 and continued to June 8, 2017 to perfect service on Father.
- Service was effected on Father via personal service on his mother; Father appeared pro se at the June 8 hearing. Child had counsel appointed and represented at the hearing.
- Father did not have court-appointed counsel at the hearing; on the record the court advised him of the right to counsel and Father stated he could not afford one and waived counsel.
- The trial court entered a decree terminating Father’s parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S. §2511. Father appealed, arguing (inter alia) that he was denied his right to appointed counsel and that the court erred in its §2511 analysis.
- The Superior Court reviewed whether Father received adequate notice of his right to petition for court-appointed counsel and whether waiver was valid; it found the record lacked any pre-hearing notice instructing Father how to request appointed counsel.
- Holding: Superior Court vacated the termination decree and remanded for a new termination hearing; before that hearing the trial court must determine whether Father qualifies for court-appointed counsel and appoint counsel if necessary.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether proceeding without appointed counsel violated Father’s rights | Trial court argued Father waived counsel after an on-the-record colloquy and had the duty to petition for counsel if indigent | Father argued he was indigent, was not given procedural notice on how to obtain court-appointed counsel, and thus was denied due process | Vacated: waiver invalid because record lacked pre-hearing notice instructing Father how to petition for appointed counsel; remand for new hearing with counsel determination |
| Whether §2511(a)(1) grounds were proven | Mother argued Father had failed to perform parental duties for the required period | Father argued procedural defects and disputed factual showing of abandonment/failure to perform duties | Court did not decide merits on appeal — remand for new hearing where merits can be addressed with counsel if appointed |
| Whether court made required §2511(b) best-interest findings | Mother contended child’s needs favored termination and adoption by Stepfather | Father argued trial court failed to analyze bond and child’s developmental/ emotional needs with respect to Father | Not resolved on appeal due to vacatur; remand for reconsideration at new hearing |
| Whether GAL/Child’s counsel adequately investigated bond and child’s needs | Mother relied on record and GAL/Child counsel participation | Father claimed GAL failed to fully investigate Father-child bond and child’s needs | Not reached on substance; remand allows development of record and consideration of these claims |
Key Cases Cited
- In re R.J.T., 9 A.3d 1179 (Pa. 2010) (appellate standard: accept trial court factual findings if supported; abuse-of-discretion review)
- In re S.P., 47 A.3d 817 (Pa. 2012) (termination review principles and deference to trial court)
- In re Adoption of C.A.S., 166 A.3d 353 (Pa. Super. 2017) (vacated termination where petitioner’s notices about obtaining counsel were conflicting/inadequate)
- In re J.N.F., 887 A.2d 775 (Pa. Super. 2005) (parent must petition trial court for court-appointed counsel; adequate notice to petition supports finding of waiver)
- In re A.R., 125 A.3d 420 (Pa. Super. 2015) (notice that explained how to obtain counsel supports trial court decision to proceed without appointed counsel)
- In re X.J., 105 A.3d 1 (Pa. Super. 2014) (parents have constitutional right to counsel in involuntary termination proceedings)