J.B., Etc. v. Fla. Dep't of Child. & Fam.

Summary

The Florida Supreme Court addresses an indigent parent’s constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in termination-of-parental-rights proceedings. The court rejects direct application of the criminal Strickland standard, establishes a Florida-specific standard requiring deficient professional assistance and cumulative prejudice, and provides a temporary procedure for presenting such claims. Applying the standard to J.B.’s claims, the court approves the First District’s decision affirming termination of her parental rights.

Holdings

1. The Florida Constitution's right to appointed counsel for an indigent parent in a termination-of-parental-rights proceeding necessarily includes the constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel.
2. Strickland v. Washington is not simply transplanted into the TPR context. A parent seeking relief must identify specific acts or omissions that, under the totality of the circumstances, demonstrate deficient exercise of reasonable, professional judgment and must establish cumulatively that, but for the deficient representation, the parent's rights would not have been terminated.
3. Until permanent rules are adopted, an indigent parent must file a motion in the circuit court alleging ineffective assistance within twenty days after entry of the termination judgment; the circuit court must rule within twenty-five days, or the motion is deemed denied, and any appeal is addressed together with the appeal from the termination order.
4. J.B. was not entitled to relief because her conclusory allegations did not demonstrate prejudice or establish that the termination result would have been different absent counsel's alleged deficiencies.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the criminal ineffective-assistance standard announced in Strickland v. Washington applies to ineffective-assistance claims in termination-of-parental-rights proceedings.
2. Whether a procedure is available after termination of parental rights to raise ineffective-assistance claims that are not apparent on the face of the appellate record.
3. Whether J.B. established ineffective assistance warranting reversal or vacatur of the termination order.

Disposition

approved