On November 7, 2007, Division Two of the Arizona Court of Appeals rendered an opinion in John M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security and Shannon M. John M. appealed the termination of his parental rights on the grounds that he had received ineffectual assistance of counsel. John argued that the Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) standard that a party must show both that the representation received fell below professional norms and that the faulty representation materially affected the outcome of the case was only applicable to criminal proceedings. Instead, John argued that the court should evaluate claims of ineffective assistance of counsel under a due process standard. The State argued that the Strickland test should be applied, and that John's appeal should be denied because he did not show that he was prejudiced by errors made by his attorney.
The Court noted that no Arizona court has directly addressed whether ineffective assistance of counsel justifies reversing an order to terminate parental rights, and if so, what circumstances justify reversing that order. The Court determined that the Strickland standard was relevant, even though that case involved a criminal proceeding, because the case relied on due process and fairness concerns and not exclusively on the Sixth Amendment. However, the Court believed that the distinction between criminal proceedings and termination of parental rights could be relevant to the standard of review applied to a case, because cases involving the termination of parental rights must balance the liberty interest of the parent in raising the child and the child's liberty interest in safety and security. The Court also believed that the role of the attorney in a termination proceeding, while important, is not as significant as the role of an attorney in a criminal proceeding, because juvenile judges are not limited to the evidence presentedand may direct further inquiry to make certain that parties are properly represented.
The Court explicitly decided not to rule on whether Arizona allows only a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as grounds to terminate parental rights, or what would be required to show incompetence. Instead, since the Strickland standard applies in termination proceedings, John M. would need to demonstrate that errors made by his attorney negatively impacted the outcome of his case. John M. did not make such a showing, so the trial court's Ruling was affirmed.
Comments