Jensen D. v. State, Dept. of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's Services
424 P.3d 385
Alaska2018Background
- Jensen D., mother of a child (Emery), faced a petition by OCS to terminate parental rights based on substance abuse, mental-health issues, and related parenting concerns; child had been in OCS custody since 2016.
- OCS pursued termination after efforts to reunify allegedly failed; superior court held a four-day termination trial in June 2017.
- Jensen was represented by appointed counsel throughout most of the proceedings; she expressed dissatisfaction with counsel but did not seek self-representation until the third day of trial.
- During trial the court observed signs that Jensen may have been under the influence and noted problems with her focus and repeated interruptions of witnesses from the counsel table.
- The court denied Jensen’s midtrial request to represent herself, citing her inability to regulate courtroom behavior and lack of objectivity and legal knowledge; Jensen later declined offered opportunities to add testimony or witnesses.
- The superior court terminated Jensen’s parental rights; on appeal she challenged only the denial of her request to proceed pro se.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the superior court abused its discretion by denying Jensen’s midtrial request to represent herself in a CINA termination proceeding | Jensen argued the court failed to apply McCracken’s test and wrongly refused her request to proceed pro se | State (OCS) argued the court properly denied self-representation because Jensen could not maintain courtroom decorum and her request came late in trial | Court affirmed: denial upheld based on Jensen’s inability to regulate her courtroom behavior (McCracken third prong); other stated concerns (ignorance of law, lack of objectivity) were not controlling but courtroom demeanor alone justified the ruling |
Key Cases Cited
- McCracken v. State, 518 P.2d 85 (Alaska 1974) (articulates three-factor test for self-representation: coherent presentation, understanding waiver of counsel, courtroom decorum)
- Barry H. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children’s Servs., 404 P.3d 1231 (Alaska 2017) (applies McCracken factors in CINA termination context; affirms denial where disruptive behavior showed inability to comport with decorum)
- Falcone v. State, 227 P.3d 469 (Alaska App. 2010) (defendant’s eccentric, disruptive defenses supported appointment of counsel despite prior self-representation)