Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. San Bernardino Cnty. Children v. B.F. (In re J.F.)

Bad Law
251 Cal. Rptr. 3d 602·39 Cal. App. 5th 70
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 26, 2019E072301California3,773 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

McKinster, J.

*73 B.F. (father) purports to appeal from a juvenile court order denying his petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 (all additional undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code), in which he requested family reunification services and increased visitation with his twin sons, J.F. and C.F. Although the order denying father's petition is appealable, and father filed his notice of appeal within the time to appeal from that order, the notice of appeal expressly stated father was appealing only from the order terminating his parental rights to the boys that was entered 44 days after denial of his petition. Because father's notice of appeal is clear and unambiguous about what he meant to appeal, we cannot liberally construe it to embrace the omitted order denying the section 388 petition and, hence, we lack jurisdiction to review that order. And, because father presents no reasoned argument why the juvenile court erred by terminating his parental rights, father has waived his challenge to the sole order properly before us. Therefore, we must affirm.

I.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The underlying facts of this case are not germane to the…

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.