legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re B.L.
W.L. (father) appeals from the juvenile court’s orders denying his petitions to change existing orders ("Welf. & Inst. Code" Welf. & Inst. Code,[1] § 388) and terminating his parental rights as to minors Blake L. (Blake) and Paige L. (Paige). ( "§ 366.26" § 366.26.) He contends that: 1) the juvenile court improperly delegated discretion to the minors as to whether visitation would occur; and 2) the court failed to advise him of his constitutional rights during the jurisdictional hearing and thus violated his right to due process.
As we will explain, because father’s arguments are unsupported by the record and his claims are not cognizable on appeal at this stage in the process, we shall affirm the orders of the juvenile court.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale