In re Geovanny O.
Appellant Jose O. (father) appeals from the juvenile court’s jurisdictional and dispositional findings and orders removing his son Geovanny from his custody and denying him family reunification services under Welfare and Institutions Code section 361.5, subdivision (b)(12).[1] Father contends he was denied his statutory and due process right to receive notice of the recommendation of the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (the Department) that he be denied reunification services because of his conviction for robbery. Father, who was incarcerated throughout the proceedings below, who was absent from the jurisdictional and dispositional hearing, and who did not submit a waiver of his right to attend the hearing, further contends the juvenile court committed prejudicial error by refusing to continue the hearing so that father could be transported to the hearing. Finally, father contends the juvenile court erred by failing to consider placing Geovanny in his care pursuant to section 361.2.
The record shows that father received notice of the Department’s recommendation that reunification services be denied; that through his counsel, father was given the opportunity to be heard on that issue; and that father was not prejudiced by the juvenile court’s refusal to continue the jurisdictional and dispositional hearing. Father never requested custody of Geovanny under section 361.2 in the juvenile court below and he therefore forfeited consideration of that issue on appeal. For these reasons, we affirm the juvenile court’s orders.
Comments on In re Geovanny O.