In re KARLA C., Part-I
<script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript"> </script> <script type="text/javascript"> _uacct = "UA-1698443-1"; urchinTracker(); </script> <html ><br /> <head><br /> <title>In re KARLA C</title><br /> </head><br /> <body><br /> <div><br /> <br/><b<br /> >In re KARLA C.,</b><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>Filed 7/21/10<br /> <br/><b > </b><br /> <br/><b > </b><br /> <br/><b > </b><br /> <br/><b > </b><br /> <br/><b >CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION</b>*<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>IN THE COURT OF APPEAL<br /> OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>DIVISION FIVE<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0<br /> ><br /> <tr ><br /> <td width=319 valign=top ><br /> <br/>In re KARLA C., a Person Coming Under the<br /> Juvenile Court Law.<br /> </td><br /> <td width=319 valign=top ><br /> <br/> <br /> </td><br /> </tr><br /> <tr ><br /> <td width=319 valign=top ><br /> <br/>SAN<br /> MATEO COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,<br /> <br/> Plaintiff<br /> and Respondent,<br /> <br/>v.<br /> <br/>P.E.,<br /> <br/> Defendant<br /> and Appellant,<br /> <br/>G.C.<br /> <br/> Defendant<br /> and Respondent.<br /> </td><br /> <td width=319 valign=top ><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> A126685<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> (San Mateo County<br /> <br/> Super. Ct. No. 79641)<br /> <br/> <br /> </td><br /> </tr><br /> </table><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> The juvenile court found that Karla<br /> C. (Karla) was at risk of continuing<br /> sexual abuse at the hands of a stepfather in the home of her mother, P.E.<br /> (Mother), and that Mother had failed to protect Karla from the abuse. The<br /> court took jurisdiction over Karla under Welfare and Institutions Code section<br /> 300, subdivision (d) and removed Karla from Mother's physical custody.[1] At the conclusion of a contested disposition hearing, the<br /> juvenile court decided to place Karla, at least temporarily, with her father,<br /> G.C. (Father), a Peruvian national who lives in Peru. Mother<br /> appeals from the juvenile court's disposition orders, contesting the ordered<br /> placement of Karla with Father outside the territorial boundaries of the United States. <br /> Because it is not clear from the record before us that the juvenile court will have the ability to<br /> enforce its continuing jurisdiction over Karla after placement in Peru, we<br /> reverse the order and remand for a further hearing to determine the<br /> enforceability of the juvenile court's jurisdiction in Peru, and to allow the<br /> court to then impose any measures that may be appropriate to ensure that its<br /> jurisdiction is maintained.<br /> <br/><b >I. Statutory Framework</b><br /> <br/>The jurisdictional findings which brought Karla under the court's<br /> dependency protection are undisputed, and the only question before us is the<br /> propriety of the court's dispositional order which would place Karla with<br /> Father.<br /> <br/>Before discussing the facts of this case, we first address the governing<br /> statute. â€