In re J. D.

Conn. App. 1 · Connecticut Appellate Court · May 19, 2025 · No. AC 47971

Summary

This Connecticut Appellate Court decision addresses a mother's appeal from a trial court judgment terminating her parental rights and denying her motion for posttermination visitation. The respondent claimed ineffective assistance of counsel because her attorney failed to present testimony from a psychologist who had evaluated her. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the record was inadequate to review the ineffective assistance claim due to the lack of information regarding what the psychologist would have testified.

Court
Connecticut Appellate Court
Writing for the Court
Elgo, J.; Bright, C.J.; Seeley, J.
Jurisdiction
Connecticut
Decision date
May 19, 2025
Docket number
AC 47971
Procedural posture
Appeal from judgment of the Superior Court terminating the respondent mother's parental rights and denying her motion for post‑termination visitation.
Precedential value
published
Parties
respondent mother v. Commissioner of Children and Families
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

termination of parental rightsfamily lawappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

family law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the appellate record is sufficient to review the respondent mother's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to call a psychologist witness.

Holdings

  1. The record is inadequate to review the claim; the presumption that counsel’s decision not to call the psychologist was strategically sound stands, and the judgment is affirmed.

Key quotations

The record was inadequate to review the respondent mother’s claim that counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to call the psychologist as a witness, as the record was silent as to the testimony the psychologist would have provided at the termination trial and the mother failed to present this court with a sufficient record to overcome the strong presumption that counsel’s decision not to call the psychologist to testify was strategically sound.

Factual background

J. was born in May 2021 and was placed under the custody of the Department of Children and Families after a neglect petition. The respondent mother struggled with substance abuse, evictions, and inconsistent participation in treatment, while the child's father was repeatedly charged with offenses and had a history of abuse. Psychologists evaluated the mother in 2020 and 2023, concluding that reunification might be possible but expressing concerns about the father's involvement. The trial court terminated the mother's parental rights and denied her request for post‑termination visitation.

Procedural history

The trial court terminated the respondent mother's parental rights and denied her motion for post‑termination visitation. The mother appealed, asserting ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to call a psychologist witness. The appellate court reviewed the record and affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…