Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Welfare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appeals court hears challenge to juvenile-court unfitness finding after contested trial and motion for new trial
Summary
A mother whose parental fitness was found unfit in a Department of Children and Families case argued the Appeals Court should vacate that finding because of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and related procedural concerns; the department and children's counsel urged the panel to affirm.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court heard argument Jan. 8 in Department of Children and Families v. Mother, Docket No. 24-634, challenging a juvenile-court finding that a mother was unfit and the denial of her motion for a new trial. Appellant counsel Nicole Paquin argued trial counsel’s purportedly ineffective assistance deprived the mother of evidence that would have supported her parental fitness and that the post-trial hearing judge did not adequately address contradictions in the record.
Paquin told the panel the trial attorney failed to call corroborating witnesses and to present negative alcohol screens and other evaluations that would have undercut damaging testimony; she argued those omissions cumulatively prejudiced the mother's ability to rebut the department’s claims about substance misuse and parenting fitness. Counsel also asked that, if the court orders a new hearing, it be conducted before a different juvenile-court judge, saying the hearing judge’s familiarity with the case risked continuing prejudice.
Lynn Murphy, arguing for DCF, said the record at the October 2022 fitness hearing contained clear and convincing evidence of unfitness based on a multi-year pattern of substance use, untreated mental-health concerns and domestic-violence incidents that endangered the children. Children's counsel also argued the record contains multiple adverse events and recommended affirmance.
The panel questioned counsel on the extent to which evidence Paquin urged into the record could have altered the judge’s findings, and asked whether affidavits and proffers outside the record at the new-trial hearing should have been weighed. Counsel for DCF said prior positive methamphetamine tests, inconsistent compliance with screening, and other historical evidence outweighed the probative value of the withheld material.
After argument the court took the matter under advisement.
