In re C.M.

Summary

The New Hampshire Supreme Court considered whether due process requires appointed counsel for an indigent parent in a child abuse or neglect proceeding under RSA chapter 169-C. The court held that there is no per se constitutional right to appointed counsel in every such proceeding, but that appointment may be required on a case-by-case basis when necessary to reduce the risk of erroneous deprivation. The court reached the same conclusion under the New Hampshire and Federal Constitutions and remanded the matter.

Holdings

1. Due process under Part I, Articles 2 and 15 of the New Hampshire Constitution does not create a per se right to appointed counsel for every indigent parent in an abuse or neglect proceeding under RSA chapter 169-C.
2. The facts and circumstances of a particular RSA chapter 169-C proceeding may require appointment of counsel for an indigent parent to adequately protect due process rights; the trial court must make that determination case by case in the first instance.
3. The Fourteenth Amendment provides no greater protection under these circumstances than the New Hampshire Constitution; it likewise does not require appointment of counsel in every RSA chapter 169-C proceeding.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Part I, Articles 2 and 15 of the New Hampshire Constitution require appointment of counsel for an indigent parent in every proceeding under RSA chapter 169-C in which the State seeks custody of a child based on allegations of abuse or neglect.
2. Whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires appointment of counsel for an indigent parent in every such abuse or neglect proceeding.
3. Whether due process may require appointment of counsel on a case-by-case basis when the facts and circumstances of a particular proceeding make counsel necessary to protect the parent's liberty interest.

Disposition

remanded