In Re Kafia M.

[¶ 1] The parents of Kafia M. appeal the judgment of the District Court (Portland, Eggert, J.) terminating their parental rights. The father, Mohamed L, argues that the evidence was insufficient to support a termination of parental rights. The mother, Shamso H., argues that her due process and equal protection rights were violated because she was not provided an interpreter when the child protection proceeding was initiated. Both parents argue that their due process rights were violated because they were not appointed separate counsel for the jeopardy phase of the case. We affirm the judgment.