J. E. v. J. N.

Summary

The court held that the defendant's unpreserved procedural due process claim was reviewable because the record adequately established a fundamental-right violation. Applying the balancing test for procedural due process, the court concluded that requiring the defendant to try the custody case without his counsel of record created a substantial risk of an inaccurate custody determination, while a short continuance would have imposed minimal burdens. The judgment was therefore reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings.