Grier v. Rita P.

[1059]

Opinion

WHELAN, J.

Rita M. P., born March 13, 1956, was declared a dependent child of the juvenile court sitting in Orange County on November 7, 1966, and continued in that status as the result of annual reviews and orders made in November of each year until 1969.

An annual review hearing was had on November 21, 1969, when the minutes show the minor was continued as a dependent child, although no formal order appears in the record as there had been in former years.

The report prepared by the probation officer for the annual review contained the following: “The minor is currently residing in Albert Sitton Home awaiting placement in a foster home. During the past year the minor’s adjustment continued to be about the same. She remained with her foster parents, the Kulbacks, with whom she had been for a couple of years until they moved to Oregon in September. In October the minor was placed in a foster home in Costa Mesa where she was beginning to make a good adjustment. Due to other circumstances in the home, however, the minor was returned to Albert Sitton Home. There is a possibility that "she will go back to Costa Mesa, however.”

On December 8, 1969, a petition was filed to have Rita declared a ward of the court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 601 upon the following allegations: “On November 7th, 1966, custody of said minor was vested with the Probation Officer for suitable placement; the minor has failed to adjust in such placement, in that on or about December 5th, 1969, she refused to remain in any foster home.”

At a hearing on January 22, 1970, over Rita’s objection, the court appointed the public defender to represent her.

After an off-the-record conference, counsel for Rita informed the court that if the petition were amended to allege “a foster home” in place of “any foster home,” Rita would admit the allegation of the petition as amended.

The amendment was made by the court who then read the petition as amended to Rita and asked, “Is that true?” to which the child responded affirmatively.

The court then found the allegations of the petition to be true, made its order to that effect in the following language: “The Court Finds the allegations of the petition true beyond a reasonable doubt in that the minor has failed in placement and refused to remain in a foster home.” and declared the minor to be a ward of the court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 601.