in the Interest of J.R.P.R., a Minor Child

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that trial court did not abuse discretion in denying trial continuance where counsel failed to file motion for continuance or affidavit or offer of proof indicating that father’s testimony was material and that counsel used due diligence to procure father’s testimony
• “The granting or denial of a motion for continuance is within the trial court’s sound discretion.”
• “[G]iven [Father’s] counsel’s failure to make an offer of proof regarding [Father’s] need to testify, the trial court’s decision to terminate [Father’s] parental rights in his absence did not violate his due process rights.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).