In re Tyrel L.
172 A.3d 916
| Me. | 2017Background
- DHHS opened protective proceedings May 21, 2014; the child was placed in Department custody and later diagnosed with autism, ADHD, and mild cognitive impairment and described as a failure-to-thrive child with significant developmental needs.
- The child has been in foster care since 2014 and in a pre-adoptive home by 2017; the mother’s parental rights were terminated in 2016.
- The Department filed a petition to terminate the father’s parental rights on December 14, 2015; the one-day contested termination hearing occurred March 2, 2017.
- At the hearing the father admitted ongoing polysubstance abuse, major depression/anxiety, need for inpatient treatment, and that he was not ready to parent the child; the court found he failed to engage in available services.
- The court found statutory grounds for termination under 22 M.R.S. §4055(1)(B)(2) (unwilling/unable to protect and reunify; failure to rehabilitate) and concluded termination with a permanency plan of adoption was in the child’s best interest.
- The father appealed, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel at the termination hearing and challenging the best-interest determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether father showed ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal | Counsel failed to prepare him, call witnesses, introduce exhibits, or effectively cross-examine; these failures prejudiced him | Counsel objected to exhibits, cross-examined most witnesses, sought a recess, and father had chances to testify; procedural requirements not met | Claim denied: procedural defects (no sworn affidavit, extrinsic assertions) and no prima facie showings of deficient performance or prejudice |
| Whether trial record lacked sufficient evidence on child’s best interest due to counsel’s conduct | Insufficient evidence presented to show reunification efforts or parenting capacity, so court couldn’t properly assess best interest | Record included testimony from foster-care supervisor, visitation supervisor, caseworker, guardian ad litem, and father; father admitted inability to parent now | Held: Court’s best-interest findings supported by competent evidence; termination affirmed |
| Whether procedural requirements for direct ineffective-assistance claims were satisfied | Father submitted signed statement asserting counsel’s failures | Statement lacked jurat (not sworn) and included facts extrinsic to record | Held: Failure to file a sworn affidavit and reliance on extrinsic evidence justified denying relief |
| Whether termination is supported by statutory unfitness grounds | Father conceded the record supports at least one ground of unfitness | DHHS relied on father’s lack of rehabilitation, inability to protect, extended state custody, and child’s special needs | Held: Grounds for termination supported; termination appropriate to meet child’s needs |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Cameron B., 154 A.3d 1199 (Me. 2017) (discusses statutory grounds for termination)
- In re Robert S., 966 A.2d 894 (Me. 2009) (best-interest standard for termination)
- In re Aliyah M., 144 A.3d 50 (Me. 2016) (procedural requirements for direct ineffective-assistance claims and affidavit rule)
- In re M.P., 126 A.3d 718 (Me. 2015) (procedural framework for raising counsel-ineffectiveness in termination appeals)
- In re Thomas H., 889 A.2d 297 (Me. 2005) (review of best-interest determinations and discretion of trial court)