Opinion ID: 1847492
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 19

Heading: removal of gal

Text: In her final assignment of error, Joanna assigns that the GAL should have been removed because he submitted a sentencing request to the criminal court urging a maximum sentence be issued [18] in Joanna's criminal case. Joanna complains that by asking for the maximum term of 5 years' imprisonment, the GAL's recommendation would have had the effect of terminating parental rights, because Joanna would not have had the ability to comply with a dispositional plan. Joanna cites no authority in support of this contention. We reject Joanna's argument. There is no evidence in this record regarding the content of the GAL's alleged statements in the criminal case. During the hearing on the motion to disqualify the GAL, neither Joanna nor Ben attempted to offer the content of that statement, or any evidence at all, in support of the request to have the GAL removed, save a request that the court take judicial notice of the argument made at an earlier hearing held on June 17, 2008. And the record includes neither a bill of exceptions nor a request for a bill of exceptions for that hearing. It is incumbent upon the appellant (or in this case, cross-appellant) to present a record supporting the errors assigned; absent such a record, an appellate court will affirm the lower court's decision regarding those errors. [19] This court cannot conclude that the GAL should be removed based solely upon Joanna's assertions without any evidentiary support for such assertions. Because Joanna has failed to present any evidence as to the content of any information that might have been given to the Douglas County District Court, the record is inadequate for us to further examine Joanna's assignment of error. We accordingly conclude that Joanna's final assignment of error is without merit.