In the Interest of RGB, A Minor

Summary

The Supreme Court of Hawaiʻi considered whether the family court abused its discretion in denying a mother's HFCR Rule 60(b)(6) motion for relief from an order terminating her parental rights. The mother alleged ineffective assistance of counsel in the termination proceeding and direct appeal, and challenged restrictions on access to confidential records. The court held that she had a constitutional right to counsel under the circumstances, that Rule 60(b)(6) was an appropriate vehicle for her claim, and that the family court properly denied relief and limited access to post-termination records.

Holdings

1. Under the circumstances of this case, due process under the United States Constitution required that Mother be provided appointed counsel during the parental-rights termination proceedings.
2. In the circumstances of this case, an HFCR Rule 60(b)(6) motion was an appropriate vehicle for raising ineffective assistance of counsel in a parental-rights termination proceeding.
3. When a claim of ineffective assistance is raised in a parental-rights termination case, the inquiry is whether counsel's incompetence rendered the proceedings fundamentally unfair.
4. Mother failed to establish that pre-termination counsel was ineffective or that the Family Court abused its discretion in denying relief.
5. Although appellate counsel did not provide effective assistance, Mother failed to show that the proceedings were fundamentally unfair or that Rule 60(b)(6) relief was warranted.
6. The Family Court did not abuse its discretion by limiting Mother's prospective access to confidential post-termination court records while permitting access to records relevant to appellate review.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Mother had a constitutional due-process right to appointed counsel in the termination proceedings.
2. Whether HFCR Rule 60(b)(6) was an appropriate procedural vehicle for raising ineffective assistance of counsel in a parental-rights termination case.
3. What standard governs ineffective-assistance claims in parental-rights termination proceedings.
4. Whether the Family Court abused its discretion by denying Mother's Rule 60(b)(6) motion based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
5. Whether the Family Court abused its discretion by limiting Mother's access to post-termination confidential court records.

Disposition

affirmed