In Re Nada R.

Good Law
108 Cal. Rptr. 2d 493·89 Cal. App. 4th 1166
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 8, 2001G027548, G027698California5,078 words

Opinion

Opinion

Michael D. Randall, Los Angeles, under appointment by the appointment by the Court of Appeal, for the Minors.

On May 24, 2000, the Orange County Juvenile Court declared Nada R. and Reema R. dependents and placed them in the physical custody of their mother, Maria G. Father Abdulaziz R. petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus and also appeals the judgment. Both have been consolidated for review. [1] He argues (1) the juvenile court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, (2) certain evidentiary rulings deprived him of due process, (3) there was insufficient evidence to sustain allegations he failed to protect Nada from sexual abuse, (4) he was improperly denied reunification services, and finally (5) he is entitled to attorney fees. We find merit in none of these contentions as presented, but our record on one is inadequate and requires that we reverse and remand as to that contention.

Abdulaziz, a Saudi Arabian citizen, and Maria, a permanent United States resident, were married in Washington on April 24, 1984. Their daughter Nada was born in early 1989, in California. Meanwhile, Abdulaziz returned to Saudi Arabia to work after completing his college degree. Maria and…

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.