In Re Earl L.

Good Law
121 Cal. App. 4th 1050·18 Cal. Rptr. 3d 74
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 2004B172287California978 words

Opinion

Opinion

Certified For Partial Publication. [*]

EPSTEIN, Acting P.J.

Nerissa H. (Mother) and Earl L., Sr., (Father; collectively Parents) appeal from the order terminating their parental rights over Earl L. and Earllia L., which freed them for adoption.

Parents contend the juvenile court violated their rights to due process (U.S. Const., 14th Amend.) by requiring them to make an offer of proof before setting a contested hearing to determine whether the sibling exception (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(E)) [1] applied. They also contend that setting Earl L. and Earllia L. free for adoption would be detrimental in light of their strong bond with two older half siblings, Jamesha T. and Jesse T.

Based on our review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the order. In particular, we conclude that the offer of proof procedure set forth in our earlier decision of In re Tamika T. (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 1114 , 118 Cal.Rptr.2d 873 applies to the sibling exception to termination of parental rights.

Mother has five children. In descending order of age, they are Unesha L.; Jamesha T.; Jesse T.; Earl L.; and Earllia L. Jamesha T. and Jesse T. share the same father. Earl L. 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.