In Re SD

Good Law
121 Cal. Rptr. 2d 518·99 Cal. App. 4th 1068
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 27, 2002G029893California6,237 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kathleen Murphy Mallinger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for the Minor.

BEDSWORTH, Acting Presiding Judge.

This is an unusual dependency case, and perhaps that is why it has run a full course, resulting in an order terminating parental rights, without anybody recognizing that it never should have been one. Stephanie D. and John D., the parents of S. [1] , are apparently small time crooks; however, there is no suggestion they were bad parents. There is no evidence they abused or neglected S., nor that they had any debilitating mental impairment or substance abuse problems. The sole reason that S. came into the dependency system was that neither Stephanie nor John was available to care for him when Stephanie was arrested and incarcerated for credit card fraud. [2] On that sole basis, the court sustained a dependency petition— erroneously, as it turned out, because there was neither any allegation nor any evidence that Stephanie was unable to arrange for care of S. during her incarceration. Such inability is the key fact that allows the court to take jurisdiction over the child of an incarcerated parent when there are no other grounds for doing so. And here there were…

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.