In Re Vanessa W.

Good Law
17 Cal. App. 4th 800·21 Cal. Rptr. 2d 633
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 2, 1993D018520California2,626 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lynne G. McGinnis, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Minor.

[Opinion certified for partial publication. [1] ]

OPINION

TODD, Acting P.J.

Geiselle C. appeals a judgment of the juvenile court terminating her parental rights under Welfare and Institutions Code [2] section 366.26 as to her minor daughter Vanessa W. Geiselle contends: (1) the court erred in finding she had not maintained frequent contact with Vanessa and continuing the relationship would not benefit Vanessa; (2) the court erred in failing to order visitation for Geiselle as part of Vanessa's permanent adoption plan; (3) section 366.26 violates due process by allowing termination of parental rights without a showing of parental unfitness; and (4) section 366.26 violates the constitutional guarantee of equal protection. We conclude none of these contentions has merit and accordingly affirm.

On May 25, 1991, San Diego County deputy sheriffs responded to a report of a disturbance at a motel in Lemon Grove where Geiselle and 15-month-old Vanessa were living. Geiselle appeared intoxicated and told the deputies she and her boyfriend had been fighting and she refused to allow him back into the room. Vanessa,…

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.