In the Interest of J.O.A., T.J.A.M., T.J.M., and C.T.M., Children

283 S.W.3d 336 (Tex. 2009) · Supreme Court of Texas · May 1, 2009 · No. No. 08-0379

Summary

The Supreme Court of Texas considered whether indigent parents may raise an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on appeal despite failing to timely file a statement of points under Texas Family Code section 263.405. The Court held that section 263.405(i) is unconstitutional as applied when it prevents review of such a claim or a meritorious challenge to the sufficiency of evidence supporting termination. Although the Court found legally sufficient evidence of endangerment supporting termination of Timothy’s parental rights, it modified the judgment to remand for a new trial on that issue.

Holdings

  1. An ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim may be raised on appeal despite the parent's failure to include it in a timely statement of points under Texas Family Code section 263.405.
  2. Section 263.405(i) is unconstitutional as applied to the extent it prevents a court from considering a meritorious ineffective-assistance or insufficiency-of-the-evidence claim arising from counsel's unjustified failure to preserve the issue.
  3. The evidence was legally sufficient to support termination of Timothy M.'s parental rights under Texas Family Code section 161.001(1)(E).
  4. When the evidence supporting termination is factually insufficient, the appropriate disposition is a new trial on the parent's parental-rights claim.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a parent may raise an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on appeal despite failing to file the statement of points required by Texas Family Code section 263.405.
  2. Whether section 263.405(i) is unconstitutional as applied when it prevents review of a meritorious challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting termination of parental rights.
  3. Whether the evidence was legally insufficient to support termination of Timothy M.'s parental rights on the endangerment ground in Texas Family Code section 161.001(1)(E).
  4. What disposition is appropriate when the evidence is factually insufficient to support termination.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (17)

  • In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534 (Tex. 2003)(followed)
  • Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)(followed)
  • M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (1996)(followed)
  • Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)(followed)
  • Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982)(followed)
  • Rogers v. Clinton, 794 S.W.2d 9, 10 n.1 (Tex. 1990)(followed)
  • In re H.R., 87 S.W.3d 691, 703 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2002, no pet.)(followed)
  • In re R.J.S., 219 S.W.3d 623, 627 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007, pet. denied)(followed)
  • Garcia v. State, 57 S.W.3d 436, 440 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)(followed)
  • Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 812-13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 17.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…