March 1, 2024
AC 46679
Mother appealed the termination of her parental rights, asserting that the trial court abused its discretion by denying her motion for substitute counsel on the morning of trial. Specifically, she argued that the court erred in evaluating her request through the lens of the child’s best interest rather than her constitutional right to effective representation.
The Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, concluding that there was no abuse of discretion. The court properly evaluated whether granting new counsel would have resulted in an unwarranted delay, and its consideration of the child’s best interest was appropriately linked to that concern. In support of her request for a continuance, Mother cited multiple factors, including alleged deficiencies in her current counsel’s representation, her recent enrollment in a substance abuse treatment program, her incarceration, and her efforts to establish contact with the child’s unidentified father.
The trial court addressed each of these claims and found that Mother’s timing in raising them—on the first day of school—appeared calculated to delay the proceedings. As such, the trial court acted within its discretion in denying her motion for substitute counsel, and the termination of her parental rights was upheld.
https://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP224/224AP153.pdf
