In Re Curtis S.
Kenneth A. v. James S.
Opinion
Opinion
Vartabedian, J.
James S. appeals from an order terminating his parental rights (Civ. Code, § 232) to his son Curtis S. Curtis’s maternal grandparents (Kenneth A. and Carol A.) petitioned for the termination approximately one year following the death of their daughter and Curtis’s mother, Kelly S. The grandparents sought Curtis’s freedom from James’s custody and control on grounds he had intentionally abandoned the child both before and after the mother’s death by failing to support and communicate with him. James raises a variety of issues, none of which are meritorious. We affirm. In the published portion of this opinion, we determine that we are not authorized to appoint appellate counsel at the public’s expense in a private section 232 action.
Facts and Proceedings
Discussion
I.-VIL*
VIII. Appellate Counsel for the Father
On this court’s own motion, we questioned whether it was appropriate to appoint appellate counsel for the father, James. Counsel was initially appointed based on a miscategorization by the Central California Appellate Project (CCAP) that this was an appeal from a criminal conviction. Upon learning of this error, we revoked the appointment. We subsequently…