Alameda County Social Services Agency v. Franklin M.

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 4th 1121·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 571·2006 Daily Journal DAR 4911·41 Cal. Rptr. 3d 909·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3396
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 25, 2006No. A109479California4,829 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Simons, J.

In this juvenile dependency case, Franklin M. (Father) failed to appear for several court dates in a multi-day jurisdictional hearing. Dissatisfied with Father’s explanations, the juvenile court in Alameda County imposed an “evidence sanction” barring Father’s testimony, though he had appeared in a timely fashion and was prepared to testify on the date the sanction was imposed. The court then proceeded with the hearing and admitted additional evidence. Several days later, pursuant to section 300 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, 1 the court entered an order adjudging Father’s daughter, Vanessa, a dependent child of the court and removing her from his physical custody. Father challenges that order, arguing, inter alia, that barring his testimony violated his right to procedural due process. We agree and reverse.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Section 300 Petition

On December 10, 2004, the Alameda County Social Services Agency (agency) filed a section 300 dependency petition on behalf of seven-year-old Vanessa. The petition alleged that she came within the jurisdiction of the court under section 300, subdivisions (b), (d) and (g). Under subdivision (b), failure to…

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.