legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Jasmine F.
The mother, Lucy F., appeals from the juvenile court’s July 6, 2012 jurisdictional and dispositional findings and orders as to her. The mother does not challenge the jurisdictional findings as to the father, Frank F. But she argues there was insufficient evidence to support the juvenile court’s findings that she knew of the sexual abuse of an unrelated child by the father and failed to protect her daughter, Jasmine F. The mother challenges the juvenile court’s jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (b) and (d).[1] In addition, the mother contends the juvenile court erred in removing Jasmine from her custody. We affirm the jurisdictional and dispositional findings and orders.

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