Botka

Appellant, mother of the minors involved in the instant juvenile court proceeding, appeals from the jurisdictional and dis-positional orders of said court pursuant to which orders and the provisions of subdivision (a) of section 600 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, 1 said minors were adjudged to be dependent children of the court. She makes four contentions: (1) That subdivision (a) of section 600 is unconstitutional because it is vague; (2) that the petition by which the instant proceedings were commenced did not give appellant meaningful notice of the charges against her as required by the due process clauses of the federal and California Constitutions and subdivision (f) of section 656; (3) that appellant was entitled, under the guarantee of due process, to findings of fact and conclusions of law; and (4) that the allegations of the petition that appellant was not capable of exercising effective care and control over her children were not established by a preponderance of the evidence.

We consider the first contention. Subdivision (a) of section 600 provides that any person under the age of 18 years may be adjudged to be a dependent child of the court “Who is…