Orange County Department of Social Services v. Kenneth Z.

Kenneth and Judith Z. appeal from a judgment which declared their son, James S., to be free of their custody and control pursuant to Civil Code section 232, subdivisions (a)(2) and (a)(7). 1 They contend on appeal Judith was denied effective assistance of court-appointed counsel, the trial court committed misconduct during the course of proceedings, the trial *933 court erred in making certain evidentiary rulings, and the judgment is not supported by substantial evidence. We find the trial court conducted an exemplary and fair trial, and substantial evidence supports the judgment. Accordingly, we affirm.

I *

II

Discussion

A. The trial court conducted an adequate hearing concerning the alleged ineffective assistance of Judith’s counsel in pretrial proceedings.

Appellants 6 first contend the trial court failed to conduct an adequate hearing when Judith’s trial counsel, Deputy Public Defender Dan Resnick, asserted a possible conflict of interest 13 days into trial and asked to be relieved as counsel. The gist of Resnick’s motion was that, without consulting Judith, various attorneys in the public defender’s office had agreed to “bindings and continuations” of the…