In the Interest of B. R. F., 338 Ga. App. 762

Juvenile court terminated mother's parental rights to B.R.F. on January 14, 2013.
Mother filed an application for out-of-time discretionary review in the Court of Appeals on September 16, 2013 (over nine months after the termination order).
The Court of Appeals initially granted the out-of-time application and affirmed the termination order; the Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari and vacated that judgment for lack of jurisdiction.
Georgia law requires an application for discretionary review of a parental-termination order to be filed within 30 days of entry; that deadline is jurisdictional and cannot be cured by an untimely filing.
Extensions of time may be granted only if requested on or before the original due date; the Court of Appeals lacked authority to grant an extension after the deadline.
The mother was advised she may seek relief from the juvenile court to pursue an out-of-time application based on ineffective assistance of counsel (including under Lassiter for indigent parents); if the juvenile court allows an out-of-time filing, she will then have 30 days to file in the appellate court; if denied, she has 30 days to appeal that denial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the untimely application for discretionary review could be considered	Mother argued she should be allowed out-of-time review despite late filing	State argued the 30-day filing rule is jurisdictional and untimely applications must be dismissed	Court held it lacked jurisdiction; untimely application dismissed
Whether the appellate court could grant an extension after the deadline	Mother implicitly relied on appellate relief	State asserted extensions must be requested on or before due date	Court held extensions must be requested on or before the original due date; court lacked authority to grant late extension
Whether an indigent parent may obtain out-of-time review for ineffective assistance of counsel	Mother argued ineffective assistance may justify out-of-time review	State noted procedural limits and required juvenile-court first-step	Court held indigent parents may seek out-of-time review for counsel ineffectiveness under Lassiter, but must first apply to the juvenile court
Proper procedural route when alleging statutory ineffective assistance of counsel	Mother sought immediate appellate remedy	State maintained juvenile court must first address the claim	Court held statutory ineffective-assistance claims must be raised first in juvenile court

Lassiter v. Dept. of Social Servs., 452 U.S. 18 (1981) (due-process standard for appointment of counsel in parental-rights terminations)
In the Interest of B. R. F., 299 Ga. 294 (Ga. 2016) (Georgia Supreme Court ruling vacating appellate judgment and explaining jurisdictional deadlines)
Rowland v. State, 264 Ga. 872 (Ga. 1995) (procedural parallel regarding out-of-time filings and criminal context)