In Re Patricia L.

California Court of Appeal Aug 13, 1992 No. D016334Published

Before: Wiener

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that de facto parent status does not terminate by operation of law and that the trial court erred by terminating such status without an evidentiary hearing to determine if a change of circumstances justified the termination.

Issues

Does de facto parent status terminate by operation of law when a child is returned to the custody of a biological parent?
What is the burden of proof for terminating an existing de facto parent status?
Did the trial court commit prejudicial error by terminating de facto parent status without an evidentiary hearing?

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“In this regard, we emphasize that de facto parent status does not terminate by operation of law or by any other automatic mechanism except where the dependency itself is terminated.”

“To terminate de facto parent status, the department has the burden of establishing a change of circumstances which no longer support the status, such as when a psychological bond no longer exists between the adult and the child.”

“We therefore hold the court's termination of Francisca's de facto parent status constituted prejudicial error.”

9 Cal.App.4th 61 (1992) 11 Cal. Rptr.2d 631 In re PATRICIA L., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

SAN DIEGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent,

FRANCISCA A., Defendant and Appellant.

Docket No. D016334. Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division One.

August 13, 1992. [64] COUNSEL

Janice R. Mazur, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Lloyd M. Harmon, Jr., County Counsel, Susan Strom, Chief Deputy County Counsel, Gary C. Seiser and John E. Philips, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Denise Moreno Ducheny, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Minor.

OPINION

WIENER, Acting P.J.

Francisca A., maternal grandmother of Patricia L., appeals a February 27, 1992, order terminating her "de facto parent" status. We conclude insufficient evidence supported the court's ruling and reverse the order.

Because this appeal concerns only Francisca's "de facto parent" status, we do not set out a detailed discussion of the facts relating to Patricia. We focus on the facts relevant to Francisca's relationship with Patricia and Francisca's participation in the dependency process.

On May 7, 1987, shortly after Patricia's birth, the court declared Patricia a dependent of the court based on a finding the child was born with a [65] positive toxicology screen for cocaine and opiates. The court placed Patricia with Francisca, where she lived for the next three years. During this time, the court granted Francisca de facto parent status and appointed counsel to represent her.

In Re Patricia L.

AI Brief

OPINION

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOTES

AI Brief