Walter W. v. Jacqueline W.

Good Law
126 Cal. Rptr. 2d 897·2002 Cal. LEXIS 7614·2002 Daily Journal DAR 12889·29 Cal. 4th 200·57 P.3d 363
Supreme Court of CaliforniaNovember 14, 2002No. S100745California5,331 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kennard, J.

In 1978, this court held that a reviewing court is required “to appoint counsel for any indigent parent appealing from an order terminating parental rights pursuant to Civil Code [former] section 232.” (In re Jacqueline H. (1978) 21 Cal.3d 170, 177 [ 145 Cal.Rptr. 548 , 577 P.2d 683 ], fn. omitted, italics added (Jacqueline H).) We concluded that an indigent parent’s right to appointed appellate counsel was “implicit in the Legislature’s entire statutory scheme for the removal of children from the custody and control of their parents.” (Id. at p. 175.) In 1984, the Legislature enacted a statute requiring a reviewing court to appoint counsel for an indigent parent “[u]pon appeal from a judgment freeing a minor who is a dependent child of the juvenile court from parental custody and control . . . .” (Civ. Code, former § 237.7 [reenacted in 1992, operative 1994, as Fam. Code, § 7895], italics added.)

At issue here is whether a reviewing court is required to appoint counsel for an indigent parent on an appeal from a judgment freeing from parental *203 custody and control a child who is not a dependent child of the juvenile court. The issue is one that we have previously…

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.