Santa Clara County Department of Social Services v. Edmond C.

Good Law
126 Cal. App. 3d 193·178 Cal. Rptr. 694·1981 Cal. App. LEXIS 2413
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 30, 1981Civ. No. 49728California4,617 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Barrydeal, J.

Appellants, Edmond and Deborah C., appeal from judgments of the juvenile court declaring their children, Eric and Edward, dependent children of the juvenile court under section 300, subdivision (a), of the Welfare and Institutions Code 1 and removing the chil *197 dren from their custody and control pursuant to sections 361 and 362 of that code.

Appellants assert (1) that there is insufficient evidence to support the finding that the minors come within the provisions of section 300 or the finding that the minors should be removed from appellants’ custody; (2) that even though the jurisdiction orders are sustained, the disposition orders must be set aside because they do not contain a reunification plan; and (3) that refusal to grant a continuance after the filing of amended petitions was prejudicial error.

We affirm the judgments.

Facts

As an appellate court, we must review the record in the light most favorable to the judgment below, and we must indulge in all reasonable inferences to support the findings of the juvenile court. (In re Luwanna S. (1973) 31 Cal.App.3d 112 , 114 [ 107 Cal.Rptr. 62 ].) With this basic rule in mind, we set out the facts from the evidence…

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.