Skip to content
Name: In re A.A.
Case #: B262556
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 01/07/2016
Summary

Juvenile court was not mandated to continue dependency jurisdiction where 18-year-old did not meet AB 12 criteria for further foster care services. The minor became a dependent of the juvenile court when he was 11 years old. He was subsequently arrested for a violation of Penal Code section 288, and after being placed with his grandmother, he left the state. In 2014, he was arrested in Arizona and returned to California. Following a delinquency adjudication on the 288 petition, he was confined by CDCR. Following his 18th birthday, the juvenile court decided to terminate dependency jurisdiction over him. The minor argued that this was erroneous because the court should continue providing him services under AB 12. The appellate court affirmed the order. AB 12 permits a juvenile court to continue to exercise dependency jurisdiction and provide benefits to eligible non-minors until the age of 21. To be eligible, the applicant must be a non-minor dependent in foster care, wish to remain subject to dependency jurisdiction, and participate in a transitional independent living plan. Here, the minor did not meet the criteria. He was not a “nonminor dependent” because he was not in foster care. The minor also indicated to his social worker that he did not want to remain in foster care, and wanted his dependency case closed. He was also not participating in an independent living case plan. The court also held that the juvenile court did not err by failing to make a “general jurisdiction” order over the minor.