In re Br. M.

Appellate court erred in reversing trial court's decision to terminate Respondent mother's parental rights on the grounds that her privately retained attorney at several hearings on a neglect petition had a per se conflict of interest because the attorney was previously appointed as GAL for one of Respondent's children and appeared at 3 hearings on an earlier neglect petition. As GAL, attorney acted at the behest of the trial court, not the State, and she was never associated with the prosecution, and was not associated with the victim for purposes of the per se conflict rule. (GARMAN, M. BURKE, OVERSTREET, and CARTER, concurring; A. BURKE and NEVILLE, dissenting.)