A.R. v. Superior Court
In a petition for extraordinary writA.R., the mother of the child S., seeks relief from the jurisdictional and dispositional orders of the juvenile court, which deny reunification services and set a hearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26[1] to determine a permanent plan for S. ( 366.26, subd. (l); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452.) Mother argues that the orders should be vacated due to several errors made in connection with the combined jurisdictional and dispositional hearing: (1) notice of the hearing was defective and untimely; (2) the juvenile court abused its discretion in denying mothers request for a continuance of the hearing; (3) the juvenile court failed to ascertain whether the 11-year-old child had been informed of the hearing and her right to attend it; (4) ineffective assistance of counsel; and (5) the dispositional order was defective. In her petition for a writ of habeas corpus, mother also challenges the jurisdictional and dispositional orders. For reasons that Court explain, Court conclude that the notice given did not comport with the requirements of due process. We will therefore issue a peremptory writ directing the juvenile court to vacate the jurisdictional and dispositional orders and to hold a new jurisdictional and dispositional hearing, and deny the petition for a writ of habeas corpus as moot.
Comments on A.R. v. Superior Court