The Court of Appeals of Utah reversed the juvenile court’s order terminating appellant-mother’s parental rights, holding appellant did not receive the effective assistance of counsel guaranteed to her via Utah Code Ann. § 78A-6-1111. The appellate court stated that under the Strickland Test for ineffective assistance of counsel, “The benchmark for judging any claim of ineffectiveness must be whether counsel’s conduct so undermined the proper functioning of the adversarial process that the trial cannot be relied on as having produced a just result.” Further, the appellate court, citing In re E.H., 880 P.2d at 13, stated that “To establish that she is entitled to a new trial based upon Trial Counsel’s ineffective assistance, Mother must show that counsel’s performance was objectively deficient and that counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced the case.” In this case, appellant’s trial counsel did not make opening or closing arguments, stipulated to or did not object to the state's evidence, did not cross-examine the state's witnesses, represented to the juvenile court that there was “nothing to argue” in the mother's favor, called the mother’s credibility into question, and immediately requested that he be released from his representation of the mother once the juvenile court rendered its decision terminating appellant’s parental rights. The appellate court found that trial counsel’s performance was an “abdication of advocacy,” and, as such, could not be considered effective assistance. In addition, the court found that the evidence in favor of termination was not overwhelming, and, therefore, the counsel’s actions resulted in prejudice to mother’s case. Accordingly, the appellate court found that mother received ineffective assistance of counsel and was entitled to a new trial.
Cite: No. 20140055-CA; 2015 UT App 230 (Utah Ct. App. Sept. 11, 2015)
Link to Full Opinion
Support Us