Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1)-(2); No-merit review pursuant to Rule 3.1(e) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Appeal from separate orders terminating respondent-father's parental rights to two children; whether the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to conduct termination proceedings related to respondent-father's daughter while respondent-father appealed the adjudication and disposition orders in the underlying juvenile case; review of the no-merit brief and respondent-father's pro se arguments concerning the termination of respondent-father's parental rights to his son; termination pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(3); ineffective assistance of counsel.

Termination of parental rights pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(1); whether the trial court erred in denying respondent's counsel's motion to continue; whether the trial court erred in adjudicating the existence of neglect as a ground for termination.

Defendant appeals the Court of Appeals' decision finding the trial court did not err in denying defendant's request for an instruction on voluntary intoxication.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred by not applying the standard for determining the existence of and showing of prejudice for a violation of the defendant's rights under the Constitution of the United States.

In armed robbery case where co-defendants sought to sever trial, Court of Appeals erred by applying standard of error preservation for severance of offenses rather than severance of defendants.

Termination of parental rights; whether the district court made adequate findings of fact to support a termination of respondent-father's parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1111(a)(2); whether the district court properly determined that termination of respondent-parents' parental rights under N.C.G.S. 7B-1110(a) was in the best interests of the children.

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding that two purchasers, the first of whom purchased a tract of real property at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale and the second of whom purchased the property from the initial purchaser, were not good faith purchasers for value.

Whether the trial court violated defendant's due process rights when it failed to hold a second hearing to examine his competency to proceed immediately prior to trial.