In Re Nachelle S.

Good Law
41 Cal. App. 4th 1557·49 Cal. Rptr. 2d 200
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 25, 1996B089459California1,839 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jane Winer for Objector and Appellant.

De Witt W. Clinton, County Counsel, Elizabeth Kim and Sterling Honea, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Petitioner and Respondent.

OPINION

ALDRICH, J. —

Ette L. appeals from the order terminating parental rights, contending the trial court erred in failing to order "ongoing and frequent" sibling visitation for the minor, Nachelle S., as part of the permanent plan. We hold Ette does not have standing to raise this contention on appeal. Even were she to have standing, we conclude no error was committed. The statute upon which she relies was not in effect at the time the trial court filed the order terminating her rights. The order appealed from is affirmed.

Nachelle S. was born on June 22, 1992. The mother, Ette was incarcerated when she gave birth to Nachelle and has a 15-year history of drug abuse, mental and emotional problems, and extremely violent behavior. [1] The father's whereabouts were initially unknown and he has never provided the minor with the necessities of life. [2] Days after her birth, proceedings were instituted under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300 [3] and Nachelle was placed in the foster home of Mr. 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.