In re Aliyah M., 144 A.3d 50

Child (Aliyah M.) subject of nearly three years of DHHS intervention for chronic domestic violence in the household, including incidents causing serious injury and exposing the child to harm.
DHHS filed a petition in May 2015 to terminate the mother’s parental rights; a three-day termination hearing occurred in September 2015.
The District Court terminated the mother’s rights in October 2015, finding by clear and convincing evidence that she had not made necessary changes in a reasonable time and that termination served the child’s best interests (22 M.R.S. § 4055(1)(B)(2)).
Mother appealed; trial counsel moved to withdraw and appellate counsel concluded there were no arguable issues but secured time for the mother to file a pro se supplemental brief.
In her supplemental brief the mother challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and, for the first time on appeal, alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel but did not file a signed, sworn affidavit supporting that claim.
The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed, holding the evidence supported termination and the mother failed both to comply with procedural affidavit requirements for an ineffectiveness claim and to make a prima facie showing of prejudice from counsel’s performance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for termination	Mother: evidence insufficient to prove parental unfitness or best interests	DHHS: record shows chronic domestic violence, inconsistent mental-health participation, risky relationships, and child’s need for stability	Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence supports termination
Procedural requirement for raising ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal	Mother: raised ineffectiveness in supplemental brief	DHHS: mother failed to file required signed, sworn affidavit specifying basis	Affirmed — claim denied for failure to file affidavit
Proper vehicle for ineffectiveness claims requiring extrinsic evidence	Mother: sought to rely on facts outside record	DHHS: such claims require a Rule 60(b)(6) motion with affidavits	Affirmed — extrinsic claims must be presented under Rule 60(b)(6) with affidavits
Prima facie showing of ineffective assistance based on record	Mother: counsel failed to stress or present certain evidence, causing prejudice	DHHS: counsel was actively engaged; alleged omissions were minor or reflected evidence already before the court and would not change outcome	Affirmed — even assuming proper presentation, mother did not make a prima facie showing of deficient performance causing prejudice

In re M.C., 104 A.3d 139 (Me. 2014) (procedural guidance for appointed appellate counsel and counsel’s statement when no arguable issues exist)
In re M.P., 126 A.3d 718 (Me. 2015) (requirements for raising ineffective-assistance claims in parental-termination cases, including affidavit and standards for prima facie showing)
In re G.T., 130 A.3d 389 (Me. 2016) (affirming standards for proving grounds for termination and best-interest determination)
Bell ex rel. Bell v. Dawson, 82 A.3d 827 (Me. 2013) (discussing prima facie standards and when factual issues require trial-court resolution)