In Re SA

Good Law
106 Cal. Rptr. 3d 382·182 Cal. App. 4th 1128
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 15, 2010D055148California8,751 words

Opinion

Opinion

Valerie N. Lankford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Minor.

McCONNELL, P. J. —

Kent B. appeals the order declaring his daughter, S.A., a dependent of the juvenile court under Welfare and Institutions [1] Code section 300, subdivision (d). [2] Kent contends we must reverse the jurisdictional order because of the ineffective assistance of S.A.'s appointed counsel in not interviewing her therapist, the juvenile court's abuse of discretion in excluding the therapist's prehearing statements and limiting her testimony on the ground of S.A.'s invocation of the psychotherapist-patient privilege, and the lack of evidentiary support for the court's finding that Kent sexually molested S.A. We conclude Kent lacks standing to raise the ineffective assistance of counsel issue, and his other contentions lack merit. We affirm the order.

S.A. was born in Trinidad in 1993. Her parents divorced when she was about eight years old, and she lived under difficult circumstances. When she was about nine years old, a neighbor sexually molested her. Her father found out and beat her. In 2003 S.A.'s maternal great-aunt, R.G., and Kent, her former husband, who live in San Diego, obtained…

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.