In the Inter of G.K., 09-08-00506-CV

2 Citing cases

  1. In re K.R.

    NO. 09-13-00362-CV (Tex. App. Feb. 13, 2014)

    Because the record does not support a finding that L.R. was indigent at any time before she filed a post-judgment affidavit of indigence, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by failing to appoint counsel at an earlier time. In the Interest of G.K., No. 09-08-00506-CV, 2009 WL 2616926, at *4 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Aug. 27, 2009, no pet.) (mem. op.). The information provided by L.R. showed that she was not indigent at the time of the hearing; therefore, the trial court did not err in failing to appoint counsel for L.R. Id.

  2. In Interest of J.M.W.

    No. 09-08-00295-CV (Tex. App. Mar. 11, 2010)   Cited 1 times

    Even in a termination case in which an indigent parent has a right to appointment of counsel, the trial court does not abuse its discretion in failing to appoint counsel when it is not readily apparent that the parent is indigent and the parent does not request appointment of counsel. See In the Interest of G.K., No. 09-08-00506-CV, 2009 WL 2616926, at *4 (Tex. App.-Beaumont Aug. 27, 2009, no pet. h.) (mem. op.). We find no indication in the record that Fisher claimed indigence before trial.