In re JAMES F.,
Filed
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION SEVEN
In re JAMES F., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B188863 (Super. |
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARCUS M., Defendant and Appellant. |
STORY CONTINUED FROM PART I……
DISCUSSION
Father contends the juvenile court committed reversible error when it appointed a guardian ad litem without inquiring about his competence and explaining the purpose of the appointment. DCFS agrees the juvenile court erred when it appointed a guardian ad litem without advising father of the consequences of the appointment. Given DCFS's concession of error, the focus of our discussion is on our determination whether the juvenile court's error was structural, requiring automatic reversal of the order, or subject to a Chapman[1] harmless error analysis.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 372, subdivision (a), a parent in a dependency proceeding who is incompetent shall appear by a guardian ad litem appointed by the juvenile court.[2] The appointment should be made if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the parent is incompetent within the meaning of Penal Code section 1367 or Probate Code section 1801.[3] â€