Summary
The Ohio Tenth District Court of Appeals affirmed a judgment terminating the mother’s parental rights and awarding permanent custody of A.S. to Franklin County Children Services. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the mother’s request for a continuance, considering the case’s procedural history, the child’s time in agency custody, and the absence of demonstrated prejudice. The opinion also addresses the mother’s claims concerning due process and ineffective assistance of counsel.
Holdings
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying mother's request for a continuance made on the first day of the permanent-custody trial.
- Mother did not establish ineffective assistance of counsel because she failed to demonstrate prejudice from substitute counsel's representation on the first day of trial.
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion and violated due process by denying mother's request for a continuance on the first day of the permanent-custody trial.
- Whether mother was denied effective assistance of counsel when assigned counsel was absent on the first day of trial and substitute counsel proceeded without adequate preparation.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (34)
- In re B.C., 2014-Ohio-4558, ¶ 19(followed)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65 (2000)(followed)
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155, 157 (1990)(followed)
- In re Cunningham, 59 Ohio St.2d 100, 105-06 (1979)(followed)
- In re D.A., 2007-Ohio-1105, ¶ 11(followed)
- In re Hayes, 79 Ohio St.3d 46, 48 (1997)(followed)
- In re Smith, 77 Ohio App.3d 1, 16 (6th Dist. 1991)(followed)
- In re K.H., 2008-Ohio-4825, ¶ 42(followed)
- In re Z.C., 2023-Ohio-4703, ¶ 7(followed)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469, paragraph three of the syllabus (1954)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 34.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…