BLANCA P. v. Superior Court

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 524·45 Cal. App. 4th 1738·53 Cal. Rptr. 2d 687·96 Daily Journal DAR 6356·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3978
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 1996G019071California9,044 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sills, J.

Introduction

At a critical hearing in this juvenile dependency case, the juvenile court judge was under a serious misimpression about what was at stake. The hearing concerned a subsequent petition which alleged that the father, Rogelio, had molested his three-year-old daughter Daisy. The judge, however, mistakenly believed that the matter had already been decided against Rogelio. At the outset he thought the hearing was a simple six-month review; he was not disabused of his misimpression until after the evidentiary portion of the hearing had been completed. The record also indicates that the judge had not read the subsequent petition alleging the molestation. Nor was any oral testimony concerning the alleged molestation presented at the hearing. The only evidence that might have supported a finding that Rogelio had molested his daughter would have to have been painstakingly extracted from a series of lengthy reports written by a social worker.

The court sustained the petition at the conclusion of the hearing and ordered a forensic psychologist to do an in-depth study of the entire family, including Rogelio’s two stepdaughters. A few months later the psychologist…

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.