Skip to content
Name: In re Zeth S.
Case #: G027568
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 06/22/2001
Subsequent History: Rev. granted 10/10/01 as S099557

Editor’s Note: Review granted on this case. At a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing, minor’s counsel “led the charge” against the mother, and advocated strongly for adoption. Parental rights were terminated and this appeal followed. On appeal, minor’s appellate counsel took an entirely different position and informed the court that the grandfather had been pressured into agreeing to adopt when he preferred legal guardianship, and demonstrated that there was a very strong bond between the minor and his mother, who continued to assume the primary parental responsibilities at the grandfather’s house. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new 366.26 hearing in light of the information supplied by minor’s appellate counsel. The new information called into question the position taken by minor’s trial counsel and raised the possibility of a miscarriage of justice. However, the court also warned that in future cases, “something more than just a statement in a brief” would be required before the court could reverse a 366.26 determination based on new information. Information concerning new developments must be made pursuant to Rule 23, which requires affidavits or other evidence for support.