Kern County Welfare Department v. Padilla

California Court of Appeal Oct 4, 1973 No. Civ. No. 1875Published

Before: Thompson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an indigent parent in a proceeding to terminate parental rights has both a statutory right under Civil Code section 237.5 and a constitutional due process right to the appointment of counsel.

Issues

Whether an indigent parent is entitled to court-appointed counsel in a proceeding to terminate parental rights under Civil Code section 232.
Whether the failure to appoint counsel for an indigent parent in such a proceeding violates constitutional due process.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It is clear from the provisions of section 237.5 of the Civil Code that legal representation must be provided indigent parents brought into court pursuant to its provisions, unless waived.”

Opinion

THOMPSON, J.* The Kern County Welfare Department filed a petition pursuant to the provisions of Civil Code section 232, subdivision (d)1 to [512]have the four Rodriguez children, Jessie, Marcos, Kennedy and Ines free from the custody and control of their father, Confessor R. Padilla, who had been convicted of the murder of the children’s mother, Mary Rodriguez, and had been sentenced to life imprisonment. The petition further requested that the children be placed in the custody and control and under the guardianship of the- Kern County Welfare Department for adoption placement.

On June 5, 1972, the trial court issued its citation requiring the father to appear at a hearing set on July 28, 1972, which citation was served upon the father on June 21, 1972, at San Quentin Prison.

A hearing was had on July 29th, neither the father nor the children being present. The probation report was received. It set forth the ages of the children, 11, 10, 9 and 7; that the deceased mother and father were separated in November 1969 and the children declared dependents of the court on February 18, 1970; that the father was convicted of murdering the mother of the children and sentenced to San Quentin. The probation report also disclosed that the father wished to keep his children from being freed from his parental control and indicated his intention to resist the petition. The probation report recommended that the court determine the minor children to be fit and proper persons for consideration under the provisions of section 232, subdivision (d) of the Civil Code and be declared free from the custody and control of appellant father. The court was requested to take judicial notice of appellant father’s conviction of the murder of the children’s mother and his sentence to life imprisonment. The only evidence presented was the probation office’s report and the request for judicial notice of appellant’s conviction.

The court declared the four minor children free from parental custody and control of appellant father and placed them with the Kern County Welfare Department pending further order of the court.

The citation served upon appellant giving him notice of the hearing read as follows: “You are hereby notified of the provisions of Civil Code § 237.5 which provide: ‘the judge shall advise the minor and the parents, if present, of the right to have counsel present. The court may appoint

Kern County Welfare Department v. Padilla

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief