IN THE INTEREST OF CHILD v. << (2011)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice Lang

Appellant Patricia Medina appeals the trial court's final decree of divorce.   In her sole issue, appellant contends she received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial.   Appellee Rene Esteban Rodriguez responds that appellant may not bring an ineffective assistance of counsel claim in this case.   We affirm the trial court's judgment.

Generally, the doctrine of ineffective assistance of counsel is limited to criminal cases.   See Cherqui v. Westheimer St. Festival Corp., 116 S.W.3d 337, 343–44 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, no pet.).   Except in limited circumstances, the Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel does not extend to civil cases.   See Kaposta v. Green, 152 S.W.3d 839, 844 (Tex.App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.);  Cherqui., 116 S.W.3d at 343–44.   Civil cases in which the right to effective assistance of counsel has been found to apply involve the termination of an individual's parental rights, see In re M.S., 115 S.W.3d 534, 544 (Tex.2003), or the deprivation of liberty.   See Lanett v. State, 750 S.W.2d 302 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1988, writ denied) (involuntary civil commitment).

Appellant's case does not involve either of the limited exceptions to the general rule.   Rather, her complaint is that counsel's ineffective assistance impacted on the trial court's ruling on the conservatorship of A.J.M. Appellant cites no authority, and we are aware of none, that extends the doctrine of ineffective assistance of counsel to her claim.   See Chrisman v. Chrisman, 296 S.W.3d 706, 707 (Tex.App.—El Paso 2009, no pet.).   We resolve appellant's sole issue against her.

We affirm the trial court's judgment.

100920F.P05

DOUGLAS S. LANG JUSTICE