In re M.E.

[¶ 1] This is the second appéal in this child protection matter. In the first appeal, we affirmed the order of the District Court (Portland, Powers, J.) finding that M.E.’s father had placed her in circumstances of jeopardy to her health or welfare. In re M.E., 2014 ME 98, ¶ 19, 97 A.3d 1082; see 22 M.R.S. § 4035 (2015). The father now challenges the court’s* termination of his parental rights to M.E. on grounds that the procedures undertaken by the court violated his due process rights, and that there is. insufficient evidence in the record to support the'court’s judgment. • We disagree and…