In Re Daisy D.

California Court of Appeal Oct 27, 2006 No. C052499Published

Before: Robie

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The juvenile court has no sua sponte duty to consider the sibling relationship exception to adoption under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, and a parent's failure to raise the issue at the hearing forfeits it for appeal. Furthermore, the record did not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel because there was no evidence that adoption would substantially interfere with the minor's sibling relationships.

Issues

Does the juvenile court have a sua sponte duty to consider the sibling relationship exception to adoption under section 366.26?
Did the appellant forfeit the sibling relationship exception issue by failing to raise it in the juvenile court?
Did trial counsel render ineffective assistance by failing to raise the sibling relationship exception or call the minor's siblings as witnesses?

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“nothing in the legislative history nor in the language of the statute itself requires that the juvenile court give sua sponte consideration to the sibling relationship exception when no party has argued it applies.”

“as the juvenile court did not have a sua sponte duty to consider the sibling relationship exception, appellant's failure to raise the exception at the section 366.26 hearing forfeits the issue for purposes of appeal.”

“there was no evidence before the juvenile court that adoption would interfere with the minor's relationship with her half-siblings.”

50 Cal.Rptr.3d 242 (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 287 In re DAISY D., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

Sacramento County Department of Health and Human Services, Plaintiff and Respondent,

Tracy S., Defendant and Appellant.

No. C052499. Court of Appeal of California, Third District.

October 27, 2006. [243] Janet H. Saalfield, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, Sausalito, for Defendant and Appellant.

Robert A. Ryan, Jr., County Counsel, and Traci F. Lee, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

ROBIE, J.

Tracy S. (appellant), the mother of Daisy D. (the minor), appeals from the juvenile court's order terminating her parental rights. (Welf. & Inst.Code,[1] §§ 366.26, 395.) Appellant contends the juvenile court erred by failing to find an exception to adoption based on interference with the minor's sibling relationships. (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(E).) We shall affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In April 2004, Sacramento County Health and Human Services filed a juvenile dependency petition concerning the 18-month-old minor, as well as her two half-siblings (ages four and seven), alleging in part that appellant had a substance abuse problem for which she had received family maintenance services and yet continued to use controlled substances. Later reports explained that the minor tested positive for methamphetamine at birth and the family accepted informal supervision at that time. According to the jurisdictional report, between August 2002 and the filing of the petition, appellant completed numerous services in conjunction with informal supervision.

The juvenile court sustained the petition and ordered reunification services.

Initially, the minor was placed in a foster home with her half-siblings but, a little over a month later, she was moved to the home of her paternal grandparents, where she had lived for three months after her birth. Her half-siblings were placed in the home of their maternal uncle, where another sibling was already residing.

In Re Daisy D.

AI Brief

ROBIE, J.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

NOTES

AI Brief