History
  • No items yet
midpage
347 P.3d 301
Okla. Civ. App.
2014
Read the full case

Background

  • N.L. is an alleged deprived child initially adjudicated deprived and placed with DHS for foster care.
  • Mother Tracy Seal failed to complete most ISP requirements and had no contact with N.L. for over two years.
  • DHS-witnesses stated termination of parental rights would be in N.L.'s best interests.
  • Foster parent testified she would facilitate contact; Mother admitted no contact or financial support.
  • Trial court found clear and convincing evidence of failure to correct conditions and that termination was in N.L.'s best interests; the child’s attorney was absent at trial and did not participate.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Right to effective assistance of counsel for the child in deprived termination NL denied effective representation due to absence of counsel State argues proceedings complied with law and advocacy concerns were not demonstrated Reversed and remanded for a new trial
Standard for assessing counsel's effectiveness in termination cases Apply Strickland-type standard requiring appellate review of prejudice State contends the standard is appropriately applied but argues no prejudice shown Applied the criminal-trial standard for effectiveness in this context
Whether absence of child's counsel violated constitutional rights and required reversal Child's right to counsel and meaningful representation denied Record shows appointed counsel with limited participation; no clear prejudice shown Reversed and remanded for new trial for lack of effective assistance

Key Cases Cited

  • In re S.B.C., 64 P.3d 1080 (2002 OK) (standard of proof in termination; relevance to rights)
  • In re K.L.C., 12 P.3d 478 (2000 OK CIV APP 98) (effective assistance standard in civil proceedings)
  • In re D.D.F., 1990 OK (OK Supreme Court) (parent’s right to counsel mirrors effective-assistance standard)
  • In re S.S., 90 P.3d 571 (2004 OK CIV APP 33) (child's right to counsel meaningful representation)
  • In re A.F.K., 317 P.3d 221 (2014 OK CIV APP 6) (adopts Strickland standard for effectiveness in termination)
  • K.L.C., 12 P.3d 478 (2000 OK CIV APP 98) (prejudice presumed when counsel acts not in client's interest)
  • D.D.F., 801 P.2d 703 (1990 OK) (counsel's right to effective assistance; standard applied)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: IN THE MATTER OF N.L.
Court Name: Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
Date Published: Dec 12, 2014
Citation: 347 P.3d 301
Court Abbreviation: Okla. Civ. App.
Log In