AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

The case concerns a mother whose parental rights were terminated. She sought to appeal the decision despite her court-appointed trial counsel's professional opinion that the appeal lacked legal merit. The mother wished to proceed with the appeal, raising questions about her entitlement to court-appointed counsel on appeal and the obligations of counsel when an appeal is deemed frivolous (paras 1-2).

Procedural History

• District Court, December 23, 1998: The court terminated the mother's parental rights (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Mother): Argued that she has a statutory right to court-appointed counsel on appeal under Section 32A-4-29(F) of the New Mexico Children's Code. She also contended that procedural protections for parents in termination proceedings should extend to appeals, and that her rights on appeal are analogous to those of criminal defendants (paras 3-4, 7).
• Respondent (Children, Youth and Families Department - CYFD): Agreed that the mother should be provided with court-appointed counsel to pursue her appeal and emphasized the importance of resolving termination appeals expeditiously (paras 6, 10).
• Amicus Curiae (Advocacy, Inc.): Supported the mother's position that she is entitled to court-appointed counsel on appeal and that the procedural safeguards outlined in criminal cases should apply (paras 6-7).

Legal Issues

• Does the mother have a statutory right to court-appointed counsel on appeal in termination of parental rights cases?
• What are the obligations of court-appointed counsel when the appeal is deemed frivolous?

Disposition

• The court held that the mother has a statutory right to court-appointed counsel on appeal in termination of parental rights cases (para 6).
• The court determined that counsel must present the mother's issues on appeal, even if counsel believes the appeal is frivolous, following the guidelines established in criminal cases (paras 7-9).

Reasons

Per Bustamante J. (Apodaca and Flores JJ. concurring):

• The court emphasized that the New Mexico Constitution guarantees an absolute right to one appeal for every aggrieved party, and the Children's Code explicitly recognizes the right to appeal judgments (para 3).
• The court interpreted Section 32A-4-29(F) of the Children's Code as providing a statutory right to court-appointed counsel for indigent parents on appeal, as the statute does not limit the appointment of counsel to trial court proceedings (paras 4-6).
• The court noted that the legislative intent of the Children's Code is to provide procedural protections for parents, which should not disappear on appeal simply because the parent is indigent (para 6).
• Drawing on precedent from criminal cases, the court held that counsel must present all issues the client wishes to raise on appeal, even if counsel believes the appeal lacks merit. This ensures the client's right to appeal is preserved while allowing the court to resolve the case expeditiously (paras 7-10).
• The court acknowledged the importance of resolving termination appeals promptly to serve the best interests of the child and bring closure to the proceedings (para 10).