In Re Maria S.

California Court of Appeal Dec 18, 1997 No. B115894Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the absence of a statutory procedure to facilitate the attendance of federal prisoners at dependency hearings does not require a juvenile court to suspend proceedings or deprive it of jurisdiction to proceed.

Issues

Does the inability of an incarcerated parent to attend a dependency hearing due to federal custody deprive them of their right to participate in the proceedings?
Is a juvenile court required to suspend dependency proceedings pending the release of a parent held in federal custody?

Disposition. denied

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the absence of such an equivalent does not require the juvenile court to suspend dependency proceedings pending Rufino's release from federal custody. Nor is the juvenile court deprived of its jurisdiction to proceed.”

“Maria deserves stability. She cannot wait until Rufino is released from federal custody or until Congress changes federal incarceration procedures.”

60 Cal.App.4th 1309 (1997) In re MARIA S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

RUFINO S., Petitioner,

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Real Party in Interest.

Docket No. B115894. Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division One.

December 18, 1997. [1310] COUNSEL

Howard S. Bodenheimer for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

De Witt W. Clinton, County Counsel, Auxiliary Legal Services, Holly Bryan Powell and Jill Regal for Real Party in Interest.

OPINION

THE COURT.[*]

Rufino S., biological father[1] of minor Maria S., challenges an order setting a permanency planning hearing (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.22),[2] contending "inability of father to attend hearing deprives him of his right to participate" in the dependency proceedings. We disagree and therefore deny the petition.

[1311] FACTS

On June 3, 1995, Maria S. was born. She exhibited symptoms of drug withdrawal and tested positive for cocaine. Rufino abused drugs and did not prevent the birth mother from abusing drugs during her pregnancy with Maria. To the contrary, Rufino actively participated in the birth mother's drug abuse during the pregnancy and, the day before Maria's birth, Rufino and the birth mother "were at a rock house using crack cocaine." Rufino went beyond helping the birth mother abuse herself and their unborn child through the use of drugs. He also physically abused the birth mother and Maria's siblings.

Rufino, incarcerated throughout most of the reunification period, has had numerous police contacts since he was 18 years old. On June 29, 1988, he was convicted of spousal abuse and placed on 24 months' probation. On February 8, 1990, he was convicted of driving under the influence, causing great bodily injury, and was sentenced to state prison for 16 months.

In Re Maria S.

AI Brief

OPINION

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

NOTES

AI Brief