In re R.K. (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 23

FCCS moved for permanent custody of R.K.; hearing set for July 11, 2016. Appellant A.S. (mother) did not appear; her court-appointed attorney was present.
Counsel informed the court he had notified A.S. of the hearing and would request to withdraw if she failed to appear; the court granted the oral motion to withdraw at the start of the hearing.
The juvenile court proceeded with the permanent-custody hearing without A.S. or any attorney representing her and awarded permanent custody to FCCS.
A.S. appealed; the Tenth District affirmed in a split decision, reasoning that A.S. implicitly waived counsel by failing to appear.
The Ohio Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction and held that the court erred in allowing counsel to withdraw and proceeding without confirming a knowing waiver of counsel; it reversed and remanded for a new hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (A.S.)	Defendant's Argument (FCCS / trial court)	Held
Whether a parent facing termination has a right to counsel that can be lost by unexplained absence	A.S.: absence does not equal waiver; court must ascertain a knowing, voluntary waiver before allowing counsel to withdraw	Court/FCCS: prior notice and failure to appear can support an inference of waiver; counsel may withdraw when client is noncooperative	The court held parents have a right to counsel that cannot be deprived unless there is an on-the-record finding of a knowing waiver; unexplained absence alone is insufficient to infer waiver
Whether trial court properly allowed appointed counsel to withdraw at the start of the permanent-custody hearing	A.S.: counsel should not have been permitted to withdraw without inquiry into attempts to contact and ability to represent client in her absence	Trial court: counsel notified client and indicated likely withdrawal if she failed to appear; withdrawal was appropriate	The court held the juvenile court should have inquired into counsel’s communications and the totality of circumstances before permitting withdrawal; granting withdrawal without such inquiry was reversible error

In re D.A., 113 Ohio St.3d 88 (Ohio 2007) (termination of parental rights compared to "family-law equivalent of the death penalty")
In re Hayes, 79 Ohio St.3d 46 (Ohio 1997) (parents must be afforded every procedural and substantive protection in termination proceedings)
State v. Rogers, 143 Ohio St.3d 385 (Ohio 2015) (waiver defined as intentional relinquishment of a known right)
State v. Quarterman, 140 Ohio St.3d 464 (Ohio 2014) (discussing standards for waiver of rights)
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (U.S. 1993) (definition of waiver and standards governing it)
Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (U.S. 1938) (waiver must be voluntary, knowing, and intelligent)