Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Daniel Y. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security, 77 P.3d 55.

39 citing documents.

In Re Termination of Parental Rights as to D.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
In Re Termination of Parental Rights as to D.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
Sec., ¶ 15 (App. 2003) (“The waiver of constitutional rights is not easily presumed.”); see also Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65 (2000) (holding that parents have a fundamental liberty interest in “the care, custody, and control of their children” under the Fourteenth Amendment); Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to Z.L. 536 P.3d 266 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to Z.L. 536 P.3d 266 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Sec., ¶ 25 (App. 2003) (relying on Moody and similar criminal case law in concluding that “’irreconcilable differences’ between client and counsel, without more, is not sufficient to merit forfeiture of the right to counsel without advance warning”).
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to P.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
In Re Term of Parental Rights as to P.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2023
Joan G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Joan G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Sec., ¶ 14 (App. 2003) (right to counsel in a termination proceeding is not of “constitutional dimension”).
Tracy D. , Tarah D. v. Dcs, T.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Tracy D. , Tarah D. v. Dcs, T.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
Sec., ¶ 14 (App. 2003) (holding a parent’s right in juvenile matters is “not co-extensive with a criminal defendant’s right .
Kasey A. v. Dcs, O.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Kasey A. v. Dcs, O.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Emily B., Andrew D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Emily B., Andrew D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Sec., ¶¶ 12, 14 (App. 2003); see, e.g., Christy A. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Aaron L. v. Dcs, S.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Aaron L. v. Dcs, S.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶¶ 14-15 (App. 2003) (due process affords parents in termination matters a right to counsel).
Shirley R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Shirley R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶¶ 14-15 (App. 2003).
Dominique M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Dominique M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Safety 410 P.3d 419 Ariz. 2018
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Safety 410 P.3d 419 Ariz. 2018
Sec., ¶ 12, 262–63 ¶ 25 (App. 2003), or (2) proceeding with the termination hearing without the parent’s counsel present, e.g., Bob H., 225 Ariz. at 282–83 ¶¶ 14–18.
Tammy M. v. Department of Child Safety 397 P.3d 1057 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Tammy M. v. Department of Child Safety 397 P.3d 1057 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2017
Sec., , (“constitutional dimension” of right to counsel in severance).
Summer P. v. Shirley M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Summer P. v. Shirley M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
P.3d 55 (App. 2003), the court then informed Summer that she had a right to represent herself and advised her of the dangers of self-representation.
Bob H. v. Arizona Dept. of Economic SEC. 237 P.3d 632 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Christy A. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 173 P.3d 463 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Christy A. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 173 P.3d 463 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Sec., ¶ 12 , because “the denial of the right to effective participation of counsel constitutes a denial of due process of law so gross as to lack a necessary attribute of a judicial determination.” Id.
John M. v. Ades, Shannon M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
John M. v. Ades, Shannon M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
In Re Jesse M. 170 P.3d 683 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
In Re Jesse M. 170 P.3d 683 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
In Daniel Y. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security, a parental termination case, we stated that the “standard for waiver of counsel under the statute is not different than it is for any other constitutional right.” -61, ¶ 15 , -59 (App.2003).
State of Arizona v. Mikal Omar Rasul Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
State of Arizona v. Mikal Omar Rasul Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2007
Donald W. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 159 P.3d 65 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Donald W. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 159 P.3d 65 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
State v. Hampton 92 P.3d 871 Ariz. 2004
State v. Hampton 92 P.3d 871 Ariz. 2004
Sec., 206 Ariz. 257, 260-61 ¶¶ 15-17, -59 (App. 2003) (noting that a defendant must first be warned of the consequences of misconduct and the risks of self-representation before he can be deemed to have waived his right to counsel by his misconduct); King v. Superior Court, 132 Cal.