In re Crystal G., 200 A.3d 267

Background

Mother (Crystal G.) appealed termination of her parental rights to four children under 22 M.R.S. § 4055, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel and errors in the court's findings and credibility rulings.
Mother alleged trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for not seeking the trial judge's recusal because the judge also presided over the domestic violence docket in which she had been involved.
Mother also argued counsel should have moved for further findings after the court largely adopted the Department of Health and Human Services' proposed findings verbatim.
She claimed some adopted findings lacked record support and the court improperly made an adverse credibility determination based on judicial notice of unrelated child-protection matters.
The District Court denied relief; this appeal challenges (1) recusal, (2) lack of independent findings/further findings, and (3) a credibility determination allegedly based on judicial notice.
The Law Court affirmed the District Court judgment in all respects.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for not moving to recuse the judge who also oversaw the domestic violence docket	Judge’s dual role created appearance of bias; counsel should have moved to recuse	Mere familiarity or prior related docket involvement does not require recusal absent proof judge could not be impartial	Counsel not ineffective; recusal not per se required and mother failed to show judge could not be impartial
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to move for further findings after court adopted Department’s proposed findings verbatim	Verbatim adoption indicates lack of independent judicial judgment; counsel should have sought further findings	Courts may consider proposed findings; key is whether judgment reflects independent judicial thought and credibility determinations	Counsel not ineffective; despite verbatim adoption, court made sufficient alterations and credibility findings showing independent judgment
Whether specific findings lacked record support such that counsel was ineffective for not challenging them	Certain detailed findings lacked full record support and thus counsel should have challenged them	Identified findings had some record support and weight/credibility are for the factfinder	No ineffective assistance: challenged findings had record support or were matters of weight for the trial court
Whether court erred in adverse credibility determination based on judicial notice of unrelated cases	Court relied on noticed unrelated child-protection matters to discredit mother’s witness	Court did not indicate reliance on those matters in its judgment and judgment did not list or discuss them	No error: record shows the court did not rely on those matters in its termination decision

Key Cases Cited

State v. Atwood, 988 A.2d 981 (Me. 2010) (recusal is discretionary and prior related proceedings do not automatically require recusal)
In re Nadeau, 178 A.3d 495 (Me. 2018) (rulings or impressions from prior proceedings are insufficient alone to require recusal)
In re Zoey H., 167 A.3d 1260 (Me. 2017) (courts may use proposed findings, but judgments must reflect independent judicial thought)
In re Marpheen C., 812 A.2d 972 (Me. 2002) (trial courts may utilize draft findings from parties; independent evaluation remains essential)
In re Child of Kimberlee C., 194 A.3d 925 (Me. 2018) (prima facie showing required for ineffective assistance claims based on counsel’s omissions)
In re Tyrel L., 172 A.3d 916 (Me. 2017) (procedural requirements for appellate review of ineffective assistance claims)
In re Child of Kaysean M., 197 A.3d 525 (Me. 2018) (appellate review standard when evidence objections are raised only on appeal)
In re Child of Troy C., 196 A.3d 452 (Me. 2018) (weight and credibility determinations are for the trial court)
In re Child of Ronald W., 190 A.3d 1029 (Me. 2018) (factual errors in child-protection orders are harmless if unlikely to have affected the outcome)