In Re Jodi B.

Good Law
227 Cal. App. 3d 1322·278 Cal. Rptr. 242
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 30, 1991H006196California2,929 words

Opinion

Opinion

Leo Himmelsbach, District Attorney, and Robert J. Masterson, Deputy District Attorney, for Minor.

OPINION

PREMO, J.

In this appeal a stepparent seeks to challenge a permanency planning order by the juvenile court (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.25) on the ground that he was not afforded adequate reunification services. We will hold that a stepparent is not a "parent" for purposes of juvenile dependency proceedings, and therefore is not entitled as of right to a reunification plan designed to facilitate return of the child to parental custody. Accordingly, the question of the adequacy of reunification services is a moot one, which renders the instant appeal subject to dismissal.

Jodi B., age 12 at the time of the order, is the oldest of 4 children. Their mother, Dianna P., is not a party to this appeal. Appellant James P. is the natural father of only the three younger children, Jamie, Brandi, and Cathy; however, Jodi has lived with him and Dianna since her birth.

The minors were all made dependents of the court in November 1987, after the court sustained a petition alleging extreme family conflict and previous sexual molestation of the three older children. A service plan for…

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.