In re E.V.
A.V. is the mother of former dependent child, E.V. A juvenile court found that when E.V. was less than a year old he suffered severe physical abuse by appellant, or by a person known by her, and appellant knew or reasonably should have known the person was physically abusing the child. (Welf & Inst. Code, 300, subd. (e).)[1]At a dispositional hearing, the court ordered the child removed from appellants custody, awarded custody of the child to his father, the former noncustodial parent, and terminated the dependency proceedings pursuant to section 361.2. The mother appealed and this court in turn appointed appellate counsel to represent her.
Appellant contends: her trial attorney was ineffective for failing to disclose all the relevant facts; the social worker was prejudiced against her; and she should have received reunification services. Court have reviewed the appellate record as summarized below with those contentions in mind. Court conclude appellate counsels assessment is accurate. Further, appellant does not make an arguable claim that the juvenile court committed an error affecting the outcome of this case. (In re Sade C., supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 994.) Court affirm.
Comments on In re E.V.