William T. v. Superior Court CA5

DISCUSSION

In his petition, William essentially contends he was never given a chance to regain custody of Johnathan and objects to the termination of his parental rights. He claims he was not notified when Johnathan was taken into protective custody and refutes the agency’s assertion that he was a threat to Johnathan. He appears to be arguing that the social worker mistakenly believed that he violated his parole by having contact with Johnathan. Had the social worker conferred with his parole officer, he asserts, she would have discovered that he was not prohibited from having contact with Johnathan. As a preliminary matter, we note that the appellate record is scant with respect to the child welfare and legal history of the case. Nevertheless, there is a reference to a no-contact order concerning Johnathan. Apparently the issue arose in October 2014 when William requested visitation. The social worker inquired about the status of the order and William’s parole officer told her the order had been lifted, but that William was restricted from leaving Riverside County without prior arrangement. However, the status of the no-contact order, as well as whether William was notified of…