In re Miyuki M.

Syllabus

The respondent mother appealed to this court from the judgment of the trial court terminating her parental rights as to her minor child, M, and denying her motion to transfer guardianship of M to M's maternal grandmother. The court conducted a consolidated trial on the termina- tion of parental rights petition and motion to transfer guardianship, and properly canvassed the respondent pursuant to In re Yasiel R. (317 Conn. 773), advising her of the purpose and consequences of the termination of parental rights. The petitioner, the Commissioner of Children and Families, submitted a stipulation of facts, signed by the respondent. The respondent's attorney agreed that there was no need for the court to conduct a canvass of the respondent before accepting the stipulation of facts. The court accepted the stipulation. The court subsequently declared a mistrial after the respondent's attorney withdrew from the case. Following the mistrial, the case proceeded to a new trial, where the court again canvassed the respondent at the start of trial pursuant to In re Yasiel R. The court then accepted into evidence exhibit P, which consisted of the stipulation of facts from the first trial. The respondent's attorney did not object to the exhibit. After considering all the evidence, the court determined that, pursuant to statute (§ 17a- 112 (j) (3) (B) (i)), the respondent had failed to achieve such a degree of personal rehabilitation as would encourage the belief that within a reasonable time she could assume a responsible position in M's life. The court also found that it was not in M's best interest to transfer guardianship to her maternal grandmother, as there was insufficient evidence that she was a suitable guardian. On appeal, the mother claimed, inter alia, that the trial court violated her right to due process when it failed to canvass her separately regarding the stipulation of facts, which she contends was essentially the equivalent of a consent to termination of her paren