legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Juan C. CA4/3
Alma G. appeals from an order pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, terminating her parental rights to her children Juan C. and Mariela Ruby C. This is Alma’s second trip to our court. She previously filed a petition for writ of mandate after her reunification services were terminated. We dismissed the petition because the notice of intention to file a writ had been filed untimely. In this appeal, Alma does not contend that Juan and Ruby were not adoptable or that the parental benefit exception to termination applies. Instead, she argues that the order should be reversed because the juvenile court did not ask her why she wanted to substitute private counsel for her court-appointed attorney on the day of the section 366.26 hearing and because the court would not grant an 18-day continuance so that her new counsel could represent her.

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