In Re RM

California Court of Appeal Jul 13, 2009 No. B210077Published

Before: Rothschild

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a juvenile dependency petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b) because there was no proof that the mother failed to adequately supervise or protect her children or that the children remained at substantial risk of serious physical harm.

Issues

Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain a juvenile dependency petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b).
Whether the mother's physical and emotional health rendered her unable to provide adequate care and supervision for the children.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We conclude that the evidence is insufficient to support the petition as to mother.”

“Nothing in the record, however, supports the conclusion that mother inadequately supervised her children, for whatever reason, or that mother should earlier have been aware of their inappropriate sexual conduct.”

“The orders of the juvenile court as to mother are reversed.”

175 Cal.App.4th 986 (2009) In re R.M. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent,

J.M., Defendant and Appellant.

No. B210077. Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division One.

July 13, 2009. [987] Judy Weissberg-Ortiz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel, and Aileen Wong, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

[988] OPINION

ROTHSCHILD, J.

The juvenile court found 13-year-old R.M. and his 10-year-old sister, S.M., to be dependent children of the court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b),[1] ordered them removed from their mother's custody and placed them in separate foster homes. We conclude that the evidence is insufficient to support the petition as to mother.[2]

PROCEEDINGS BELOW

A 2004 family law order awarded custody of R.M. and his sister, S.M., to mother and visitation rights to their father. In June 2008 the Los Angeles County Department of Family and Children Services (DCFS) filed a petition in juvenile court only under section 300, subdivision (b) alleging that R.M. and S.M. had suffered and were at substantial risk of suffering serious physical harm as a result of their parents' inability to adequately supervise or protect them. The record does not disclose how the family came to the attention of the DCFS. Mother and father waived their right to a trial on the allegations and the court sustained the petition on the basis of the reports submitted by the DCFS.

In Re RM

AI Brief

PROCEEDINGS BELOW

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

NOTES

AI Brief