In Re Vanessa M.

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1123 OPINION In this juvenile dependency case, Franklin M. (Father) failed to appear for several court dates in a multi-day jurisdictional hearing. Dissatisfied with Father's explanations, the juvenile court in Alameda County imposed an "evidence sanction" barring Father's testimony, though he had appeared in a timely fashion and was prepared to testify on the date the sanction was imposed. The court then proceeded with the hearing and admitted additional evidence. Several days later, pursuant to section 300 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, 1 the court entered an order adjudging Father's daughter, Vanessa, a dependent child of the court and removing her from his physical custody. Father challenges that order, arguing, inter alia, that barring his testimony violated his right to procedural due process. We agree and reverse. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Section 300 Petition On December 10, 2004, the Alameda County Social Services Agency (agency) filed a section 300 dependency petition on behalf of seven-year-old Vanessa. The petition…