In Re Jennifer

California Court of Appeal Jan 26, 1988 No. G004541Published

Before: Wallin

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the standard of proof for the jurisdictional phase of a child dependency proceeding is a preponderance of the evidence, and that a parent's stipulation to a dispositional order does not waive the right to appeal jurisdictional findings absent an explicit admission.

Issues

Whether a jurisdictional order in a dependency proceeding is appealable.
Whether a parent waives the right to challenge jurisdictional findings by stipulating to a dispositional order.
Whether the standard of proof for jurisdictional findings in dependency proceedings is a preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We choose to follow the majority rule that the standard of proof required for finding jurisdiction is a preponderance of the evidence.”

197 Cal.App.3d 1206 (1988) 243 Cal. Rptr. 441 In re JENNIFER V., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

ORANGE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent,

DALE V., Defendant and Appellant.

Docket No. G004541. Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Three.

January 26, 1988. [1208] COUNSEL

Kenneth J. Sargoy, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Adrian Kuyper, County Counsel, and Wanda S. Florence, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Donna L. Groman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Respondent Minor.

OPINION

WALLIN, J.

A father argues the juvenile court applied the wrong standard of proof at the jurisdictional phase of a child dependency proceeding. We find no error and affirm.

A petition filed May 29, 1986, alleged Jennifer V. was within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court because she was sexually abused by her father and neglected by her mother. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300, subd. (d).)[1] On July 29, 1986, at the conclusion of a hotly contested jurisdictional hearing, the court found the allegations of the petition true by a preponderance of the evidence.

On August 19 the parties stipulated to a dispositional order declaring Jennifer a dependent child of the juvenile court, vesting custody in the social services director and releasing Jennifer to the care of her paternal uncle and his wife. Jennifer's father, Dale V., thereafter appealed "from the judgment ... entered July 29, 1986" i.e., the jurisdictional order.

Preliminarily, the minor's attorney presents two grounds for dismissal of the appeal. First, she contends the jurisdictional order itself is

In Re Jennifer

AI Brief

OPINION

WALLIN, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

III

NOTES

AI Brief