A. Any party may appeal from a judgment of the court to the court of appeals in the manner provided by law. The appeal shall be heard by the court of appeals upon the files, records and transcript of the evidence of the court. Absent an order of the appellate court, files and records that are required to be kept confidential and closed to the public, pursuant to any provision of the Children's Code shall be kept confidential and closed to the public on appeal.

B. The appeal to the court of appeals does not stay the judgment appealed from, but the court of appeals may order a stay upon application and hearing consistent with the provisions of the Children's Code if suitable provision is made for the care and custody of the child. If the order appealed from grants the legal custody of the child to or withholds it from one or more of the parties to the appeal, the appeal shall be heard at the earliest practicable time.

C. If the court of appeals does not dismiss the petition and order the child released, it shall affirm the court's judgment or it shall modify the court's judgment and remand the child to the jurisdiction of the court for disposition consistent with the appellate court's decision on the appeal. Any party may appeal to the supreme court in the manner provided by law.

D. A child who has filed notice of appeal shall be furnished a transcript of the proceedings, or as much of it as is requested, without cost upon the filing of an affidavit that the child or the person who is legally responsible for the care and support of the child is financially unable to purchase the transcript.

E. Appeals from the court to the court of appeals shall proceed in accordance with time limits to be established by the supreme court.

F. Appeals from a tribal court order shall proceed pursuant to tribal law to an appropriate tribal court.

History: 1978 Comp., § 32A-1-16, enacted by Laws 1993, ch. 77, § 26; 1995, ch. 22, § 1; 1995, ch. 206, § 8; 1999, ch. 195, § 1.

Cross references. — For appeals from the Children's Court, see the Rules of Appellate Procedure, 12-101 NMRA.

The 1999 amendment, effective July 1, 1999, in Subsection A rewrote the last sentence, which formerly read "The name of the child shall not appear in the record on appeal".

The 1995 amendment, effective July 1, 1995, deleted "children's" preceding "court" in Subsections A, C, and E and added Subsection F. Laws 1995, ch. 22, § 1, effective June 16, 1995, also amended this section. The section was set out as amended by Laws 1995, ch. 206, § 8. See 12-1-8 NMSA 1978.

Section 39-3-3 NMSA 1978 governs interlocutory appeals of suppression of evidence orders from a children's court. State v. Jade G., 2007-NMSC-010, 141 N.M. 284, 154 P.3d 659.

Decisions under prior law. — In light of the similarity of the provisions, annotations decided under former Section 32-1-39 NMSA 1978 have been included in the annotations to this section.

While appeal of abuse and neglect adjudication is pending, the children's court has jurisdiction to take further action in the case. State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dept. v. Frank G., 2005-NMCA-026, 137 N.M. 137, 108 P.3d 543, aff'd, 2006-NMSC-019, 139 N.M. 459, 134 P.3d 746.

Subsection A allows any party to appeal as provided by law. State v. Jade G., 2005-NMCA-019, 137 N.M. 128, 108 P.3d 534, aff'd, 2007-NMSC-010, 141 N.M. 284, 154 P.3d 659.

State has right to appeal judgments of the children's court. State v. Doe, 1978-NMCA-124, 92 N.M. 354, 588 P.2d 555, cert. denied, 92 N.M. 353, 588 P.2d 554 (1979).

"Appeals in the manner provided by law" interpreted. — This section does not create a right to appeal, but requires a determination of whether the appeal is authorized by another statute. State v. Nehemiah G., 2018-NMCA-034, cert. denied.

Where child pleaded guilty to two counts of second-degree murder and three counts of intentional child abuse resulting in death for shooting and killing his father, mother, and three younger siblings, and where the state appealed the children's court judge's finding that the state failed to prove that child is not amenable to treatment or rehabilitation as a child in available facilities, the state was authorized to appeal the children's court judge's finding, because under 39-3-7 NMSA 1978, any aggrieved party, in any special statutory proceeding in the district court, may appeal the entry of any final judgment or decision, or any final order after entry of judgment which affects substantial rights, and in this case, the state was an aggrieved party and proceedings under the Children's Code are special statutory proceedings. State v. Nehemiah G., 2018-NMCA-034, cert. denied.

Standing to appeal. — The children, youth and families department has standing to appeal the judgment of disposition of a child that is placed in its custody. State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep't v. Paul G., 2006-NMCA-038, 139 N.M. 258, 131 P.3d 108.

Right to court-appointed counsel. — Mother had a right to court-appointed counsel on appeal of a decision terminating her parental rights and counsel had an obligation to present her issues in accordance with the guidelines set forth in State v. Franklin, 78 N.M. 127, 428 P.2d 982 (1967). State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep't v. Alice P., 1999-NMCA-098, 127 N.M. 664, 986 P.2d 460, cert. denied, 127 N.M. 391, 981 P.2d 1209.

State questioning legal sufficiency of its own pleadings. — The state's appeal of the children's court order continuing a child on probation and granting her equal custody to one not a parent presented the anomalous situation of the state questioning the legal sufficiency of its own pleadings, but it would be entertained since proceedings concerning the custody of minors are not adversary, and the court therein is not merely an arbiter but an advocate seeking to protect the welfare and interests of the minor. In re Doe, 1975-NMCA-131, 88 N.M. 505, 542 P.2d 1195.

Clerk of court of appeals deletes child's name. — The clerk of the court of appeals is directed to delete the child's name from all records in this court and substitute the fictitious name of "John Doe." In re Doe, 1973-NMCA-141, 85 N.M. 691, 516 P.2d 201 (see Rule 12-305 NMRA).

Stay from prosecution should be granted in appeal from order transferring juvenile to district court to stand trial as an adult. State v. Greg R., 1986-NMCA-096, 104 N.M. 778, 727 P.2d 86, cert. denied, 104 N.M. 761, 726 P.2d 1391.

Effect of no application for stay of transfer order. — An order transferring a juvenile from the children's court to the district court is a "judgment"; thus, having failed to request a stay, the defendant waives any impediment to the state's obtaining a grand jury indictment of the defendant pending appeal of the order. State v. Hovey, 1987-NMSC-080, 106 N.M. 300, 742 P.2d 512.

Issue of parental rights to be raised by parent. — The state, prosecuting the probation revocation petition of a child in need of supervision, can appropriately challenge the custody arrangements made by the court, but since those custody arrangements and thus their effect on parental rights are of limited duration, the issue of parental rights is one to be raised by the parent and not by the state; a violation of due process can be urged only by those who can show an impairment of their rights in the application of the statute to them. In re Doe, 1975-NMCA-131, 88 N.M. 505, 542 P.2d 1195.

Court's discretion not to be disturbed absent showing of abuse. — Exercise of the court's discretion should not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of a showing of manifest abuse. In re Doe, 1975-NMCA-131, 88 N.M. 505, 542 P.2d 1195.

Supreme court review on appeal or writ of error. — A proceeding under act relating to dependent and neglected children was not a special proceeding, but was a civil action, and the judgment therein was reviewable in the supreme court on appeal or writ of error. Blanchard v. State ex rel. Wallace, 1925-NMSC-018, 30 N.M. 459, 238 P. 1004.

Transfer order may be summarily affirmed. — Summary affirmance was due on order transferring a juvenile from children's court to be tried as an adult even though juvenile filed a timely memorandum in opposition to affirmance, and though continuing to contest summary disposition, he provided no reasons why the summary disposition should not be made. State v. Greg R., 1986-NMCA-096, 104 N.M. 778, 727 P.2d 86, cert. denied, 104 N.M. 761, 726 P.2d 1391.

Supreme court without jurisdiction to review interlocutory order. — Where in an adoption proceeding based upon written consent of the parents to the adoption of their infant child, the trial court granted the parents' motion to withdraw their previous consent, and at the same time retained jurisdiction to declare the child found to be a dependent and neglected child, a ward of the court, and place it under the control and direction of New Mexico department of public welfare (now human services department), leaving temporary custody of the child with the adoptive parents pending further order of the court, the order was interlocutory in nature and the supreme court was without jurisdiction to review it. In re Adoption of Helms, 1955-NMSC-024, 59 N.M. 177, 281 P.2d 140.

Review of best interests determination. — The best interests determination of the children's court attorney is subject to judicial review by the children's court and by the New Mexico court of appeals. State v. Doe, 1982-NMCA-065, 97 N.M. 792, 643 P.2d 1244.

Exhibits on appeal. — Where a child sexual abuse victim had difficulty expressing herself about the offense, a stick figure drawing made by the court together with the victim's testimony, was evidence considered by the children's court in formulating its decision and was properly included in the record on appeal. State v. Benny E., 1990-NMCA-052, 110 N.M. 237, 794 P.2d 380.

Release of child's name. — A law enforcement agency is not prohibited from releasing to the public the names of juveniles who have been arrested for criminal acts and the charges for which they were arrested. 1987 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 87-29 (now Section 32A-2-32 NMSA 1978).

Law reviews. — For comment, "Poteet v. Roswell Daily Record, Inc.: Balancing First Amendment Free Press Rights Against a Juvenile Victim's Right to Privacy," see 10 N.M.L. Rev. 185 (1979-1980).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 47 Am. Jur. 2d Juvenile Courts and Delinquent and Dependent Children § 118 et seq.

43 C.J.S. Infants § 101.