In re Corey T., 178 A.3d 1238

Child taken into Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) custody at birth on April 22, 2017; preliminary protection order entered that day.
At contested hearing, trial court found the infant in jeopardy to health and welfare and entered a jeopardy order on September 14, 2017.
Court’s factual findings emphasized mother’s diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, difficulty with daily functioning and social interaction, and testimony that she can only manage her own activities of daily living and cannot appropriately care for an infant.
Mother has lived in a women’s homeless shelter long-term and was expected to move to adult supported group housing providing 24-hour support; the group home is for adults only and estimated residency (6 months–2 years) would delay permanency for the infant.
The jeopardy order also relieved DHHS of the obligation to provide reunification services to the mother; that portion of the order is interlocutory and not addressed on appeal.
Mother appealed, arguing insufficient evidence to support jeopardy and raising ineffective-assistance-of-counsel; the court addressed sufficiency and declined to find any cognizable ineffective-assistance showing on the record.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence supported finding of jeopardy under 22 M.R.S. § 4035	Mother: record insufficient to show by preponderance that child was in jeopardy	DHHS: testimony and clinical findings show mother cannot safely care for infant and housing/services insufficient for timely permanency	Affirmed — competent evidence supports jeopardy finding by preponderance
Whether denial of reunification services is reviewable in this appeal	Mother challenged denial of reunification services	DHHS: dispositional orders after jeopardy findings are not appealable here	Not addressed — challenge is to an interlocutory/dispositional matter and not reviewable on this appeal
Whether ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim warrants reversal of jeopardy order	Mother: counsel was ineffective at the jeopardy hearing	DHHS: no prima facie showing of serious incompetence or prejudice	Rejected — record does not support prima facie claim of ineffective assistance
Standard for appellate review of jeopardy finding	Mother: (implicit) contends standard not met	DHHS: finding must be supported by competent evidence making jeopardy more likely than not	Court applied preponderance standard and cited precedent; finding upheld

In re Nicholas S., 140 A.3d 1226 (Me. 2016) (standard for proving jeopardy by preponderance of evidence)
In re Z.S., 121 A.3d 1286 (Me. 2015) (dispositional orders following jeopardy findings are not appealable)
In re Johnna M., 903 A.2d 331 (Me. 2006) (procedural limits on appeals from child protection orders)
In re Evelyn A., 169 A.3d 914 (Me. 2017) (discussing evolving jurisprudence on ineffective-assistance claims in child protection cases)
In re Aliyah M., 144 A.3d 50 (Me. 2016) (prima facie showing required for ineffective-assistance claims)
In re Tyrel L., 172 A.3d 916 (Me. 2017) (defining prejudice and competency standards for counsel in child protection appeals)