Lee v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2016 Ark. 87
| Ark. | 2016Background
- June 29, 2015: Ouachita County juvenile court granted permanent custody of two children to Barbara and Christopher Domain and closed the case; Sandra Lee was the biological parent whose custody was terminated.
- Lee was represented by appointed counsel David L. Chambers; the record shows the circuit court, at Lee’s request, relieved Chambers, but counsel retained certain duties before ending representation under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 6-9.
- Lee says she attempted to file notices of appeal in April and June 2015 but both were “denied.”
- A notice of appeal was due within 21 days of the June 29, 2015 order under Sup. Ct. R. 6-9(b)(1); Lee’s filing in January 2016 was therefore untimely.
- Lee filed a motion with the Arkansas Supreme Court seeking to treat the untimely filing as a motion for a belated appeal.
- The Court treated the submission as a motion for belated appeal and, because the record did not plainly resolve whether attorney error caused the failure to perfect the appeal, remanded to the trial court for factual findings concerning attorney fault. Justice Danielson dissented, preferring denial for failure to show good reason.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the untimely appeal should be treated as a motion for belated appeal | Lee says she attempted timely filings that were denied and seeks belated appeal relief | Timeliness rule under Sup. Ct. R. 6-9(b)(1) was not met; failure to perfect appeal | Court treated the submission as a motion for belated appeal (remedial posture accepted) |
| Whether attorney or party fault caused the untimely appeal | Lee implies filings were prevented/denied (suggesting non-attorney fault) | Circuit record suggests counsel was relieved but remained subject to duties; attorney fault possible | Remanded to trial court to make findings whether attorney error occurred before this Court decides relief |
| Whether an affidavit admitting attorney fault is required | Lee did not provide an affidavit admitting fault | Court’s precedent: affidavit is no longer required but counsel should candidly admit fault where appropriate | No affidavit required; candid admission encouraged; factual inquiry may require remand if unclear |
| Standard for granting belated appeal (good reason vs. admission of fault) | Lee contends circumstances justify belated appeal | State argues absence of timely perfection and no showing of good reason | Court applied McDonald standard: either admit attorney fault or show good reason; remand for factual findings on attorney error; dissent would deny for lack of good reason |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonald v. State, 356 Ark. 106 (2004) (explains choice: admit attorney fault or show good reason for failure to perfect appeal)
- Ratliff v. Ark. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 371 Ark. 534 (2007) (denial of belated appeal where good reason not shown)
- Flannery v. Ark. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 368 Ark. 31 (2006) (per curiam denying belated-appeal relief where good reason lacking)