In re R.G., 537 P.3d 627

Child born January 2020; Mother tested positive for illegal substances at birth and during pregnancy; Child removed and DCFS custody ordered after court found prenatal substance use and sibling-at-risk status.
Juvenile court ordered reunification services; after about a year services were terminated for Mother’s failure to comply and engage.
First termination trial (November 2021): Mother did not appear; Counsel was released midtrial; termination order entered but later vacated on stipulated summary reversal and case remanded for a new trial.
Second termination trial (April 2022): Court allowed virtual attendance if video remained on; Mother did not appear at any of the three trial days.
Counsel sought continuance and then moved to withdraw during trial, but admitted she had not complied with the certification requirements of Utah R. Juv. P. 53(c); court denied the motion and required Counsel to continue representing Mother.
Juvenile court entered an order terminating Mother’s parental rights; Mother appealed arguing (1) the court abused its discretion by denying Counsel’s withdrawal and (2) Counsel provided ineffective assistance in Mother’s absence. The appellate court affirmed.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	State/GAL Argument	Held
Whether the juvenile court abused its discretion by denying appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw midtrial	Counsel faced a legal conflict and could not effectively defend without Mother; withdrawal was necessary	Counsel failed to satisfy rule 53(c) certification requirements; motion was untimely and discretionary to deny	No abuse of discretion: Counsel did not meet rule 53(c) requirements and denial was within the court’s discretion
Whether Counsel’s continued representation in Mother’s absence amounted to ineffective assistance	Court’s denial forced Counsel into a conflict, producing objectively unreasonable performance and prejudice	Mother had actual notice and chose not to appear; parents have no absolute right to be present; any limitation on defense resulted from Mother’s absence, not Counsel’s performance	No ineffective assistance: Counsel’s representation was not objectively unreasonable and deficiencies (if any) arose from Mother’s failure to appear, not counsel misconduct

State v. Scales, 946 P.2d 377 (Utah Ct. App. 1997) (withdrawing appointed counsel is within the court’s discretion)
In re S.S., 360 P.3d 16 (Utah Ct. App. 2015) (ineffective-assistance-on-appeal presents a question of law)
In re D.G., 522 P.3d 39 (Utah Ct. App. 2022) (standard for ineffective-assistance claims in juvenile proceedings)
State v. Scott, 462 P.3d 350 (Utah 2020) (objective-reasonableness standard for attorney performance)
In re Z.Z., 310 P.3d 772 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (no absolute right to attend child-welfare trials; notice suffices)
Cougar Canyon Loan, LLC v. Cypress Fund, LLC, 466 P.3d 171 (Utah 2020) (courts should follow plain language of procedural rules and not rewrite them on appeal)