Background
Lamar County DFCS took custody of A. D. C. in March 2023 following a dependency finding based on the parents’ substance abuse and lack of housing.
In April 2025, the juvenile court terminated the parental rights of Alisha Leanne Holloway and the child’s putative father. Holloway moved for a new trial, which was denied, and then obtained discretionary appellate review.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals vacated the termination order and remanded. At the termination hearing, DFCS counsel said Holloway was apparently proceeding pro se, but the juvenile court made no inquiry into her representation, did not advise her of her statutory right to counsel, and made no record finding that she knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived that right.
On remand, the juvenile court must determine on the record whether Holloway was indigent and entitled to appointed counsel. If she was indigent, or if she was not indigent but did not waive counsel through a lack of reasonable diligence in retaining private counsel, the court must appoint counsel as appropriate and hold a new termination hearing. If it finds a valid waiver, it may reenter its original judgment.
Key Takeaways
- A parent facing termination of parental rights has a statutory right to counsel at all stages of the proceeding.
- A waiver of counsel must be knowing, intelligent, voluntary, and reflected in the record.
- A juvenile court must make the required indigency and waiver determinations before terminating parental rights of an unrepresented parent.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that termination proceedings require stringent procedural safeguards. A court cannot infer waiver merely because a parent appears without counsel.
The ruling provides a specific remand framework for juvenile courts when the record does not establish whether an unrepresented parent was entitled to appointed counsel or validly waived counsel.