In Re Nemis M.

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1346 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1347 OPINION Appellant Manuel M. appeals from the juvenile court's dispositional order removing his 15-year-old daughter, Nemis M., from parental custody based upon the court's finding that his 18-year-old son, Manuel, Jr., 1 had sexually molested Nemis and that he and her mother had failed to adequately protect Nemis from such abuse within the meaning of Welfare and Institutions Code section 300 , subdivisions (b) and (d). 2 Appellant contends that hearsay statements made by Nemis, who was found incompetent to testify at the hearing, should have been excluded and without such statements, there is no evidence supporting the court's findings. He also contends the court erred by wrongfully entering a default against him. (1) (See fn. 3.) We conclude prejudicial error occurred in the proceedings and reverse. 3 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On June 22, 1995, a petition was filed in the juvenile court…