Morgan

Morgan v. Mayfield CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 29, 2025C097883California3,057 words

Opinion

Opinion

Krause, J.

BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEDURE

On or about June 8, 2018, Sacramento County Department of Child, Family and Adult Services (the county agency) filed juvenile dependency petitions on behalf of Morgan’s children. The petitions alleged that Morgan had a history of drug abuse and mental health problems that jeopardized the children’s safety. In response to the petitions, the juvenile court scheduled a detention hearing and appointed counsel for the parties. Dependency Associates of Sacramento (Dependency Associates) was appointed as Morgan’s counsel, and attorney Stephen Avis was assigned to her case. Morgan appeared at the detention hearing on June 12, 2018, represented by Avis. Before the hearing, Avis determined, based on conversations with Morgan, that Morgan lacked the mental capacity to assist him in protecting her rights. Thus, Avis asked the juvenile court to appoint a guardian ad litem. The court explained to Morgan the purpose of a guardian ad litem and the broad powers that he or she would have to direct and control litigation on her behalf. Morgan said she understood and consented to the appointment, adding that it “[s]ounds good.” The court appointed Mayfield as Morgan’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.