Orange County Social Services Agency v. Angel R.

California Court of Appeal Apr 30, 1991 No. No. G009929Published

Before: Sonenshine

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court erred in terminating parental rights because the social services agency failed to provide clear and convincing evidence that the minors were likely to be adopted.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in finding the minors were adoptable under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, subdivision (c).
Whether the evidence presented was sufficient to support the termination of parental rights.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The court “shall terminate parental rights if it determines by clear and convincing evidence that it is likely that the minor will be adopted.”

“Here, the permanency hearing report indicated a few foster parents were considering adoption. This is a far cry, however, from the clear and convincing evidence required to establish the likelihood of adoption.”

“In the absence of clear and convincing evidence to satisfy the statute, it is error to leave a child without any parent.”

Opinion

SONENSHINE, J. Angel R. appeals the trial court’s orders terminating his parental rights to his 10 minor children. He contends there was no evidence to support the court’s finding the minors were adoptable; thus, termination of his parental rights was premature. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26, subds. (c)(1) & (c)(2).)1 We agree and reverse accordingly.

[1062]I.

Nine of appellant’s ten children, ranging in age from one to nine years, were taken into protective custody on April 17, 1989, while appellant and his wife were panhandling in an Anaheim parking lot. The children were filthy, improperly clothed, and had not eaten that day. Several of them had never attended school. The parents were arrested for being under the influence of a controlled substance and for child neglect, and were incarcerated in Anaheim city jail.

Appellant had an extensive criminal background dating back to 1975. He had been arrested for, among other things, being under the influence of a controlled substance, unlawful possession of a controlled substance, transporting and selling a controlled substance, burglary, receiving stolen property, assault, battery, armed robbery, and statutory rape. Also on file were a number of reports of child abuse in Orange County, San Joaquin County and Santa Cruz County.

Petitions to declare the children dependents of the court were filed on April 19. (§ 300, subds. (b) & (g).) On May 2, appellant’s wife gave birth to child number 10, who was taken into protective custody a few days later. A petition to declare the infant a dependent child was filed on May 9. (§ 300, subds. (b), (g) & (j).) At an uncontested dispositional hearing held August 3, the minors were declared dependent children of the juvenile court and were placed in various foster homes.2

A six-month review hearing was held February 15, 1990. Attempts to locate appellant and his wife proved futile, and declarations to that effect were filed with the court. The court terminated reunification services and ordered that a hearing to terminate parental rights under section 366.26 be held within 120 days. As authorized by the court, the social services agency (SSA), during April, published notices of the upcoming June 1 hearing.

Two supplemental court reports were prepared for the permanency hearing, each covering five of the ten children. The reports indicated the following: Amelia, Antonio and Adrian were together in one foster home, and Angelo and Angela together in another; in each instance, the foster parents were considering adoption. Angel and Ariel had been placed together in one foster home, and Adam and Armando together in another; both sets of

Orange County Social Services Agency v. Angel R.

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief