Skip to content
Name: In re Jesse S.
Case #: G054169
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 06/07/2017

Nonminor could not reenter foster care system under section 388.1 where his adoptive parents were still receiving payments from California's Adoption Assistance Program. About four months before his twentieth birthday, appellant Jesse filed a request under section 388.1 to return to juvenile court jurisdiction and foster care. His adoptive parents were no longer supporting him even though they were receiving payments on his behalf from California's Adoption Assistance Program (AAP). The judge denied Jesse's request, noting that under the literal language of section 388.1, he could not reenter the dependency system when his parents were receiving AAP…

View Full Summary
Name: In re David B.
Case #: A146632
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 06/07/2017

Minor's appeal was dismissed as moot where appellant was now 18 and relief requested could not be provided. Appellant David was not quite 18 when the juvenile court dismissed a dependency petition alleging that he was abandoned by his mother and left without means of support. David was a victim of gun violence, and was a wheelchair-bound diabetic in need of daily assistance. He lived in a homeless shelter at the time of the petition. David appealed the dismissal order. The Department contended that the appeal is moot because David is now 18 and the…

View Full Summary
Name: N.S. v. Superior Court
Case #: A148694
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 12/16/2016

Nonminor dependent did not waive psychotherapist-patient privilege by offering letter from therapist in support of continuation of dependency status. N.S. was a nonminor dependent of the juvenile court. The Agency moved for dismissal of the dependency action because N.S. had not participated in services or maintained contact with the Agency. At a contested hearing, N.S.'s therapist was called to testify about a letter she wrote stating that N.S. had a diagnosis that kept her from participating in services. When asked about the diagnosis, the therapist asserted the psychotherapist-patient privilege. The juvenile court ordered her to…

View Full Summary
Name: In re W.C.
Case #: A148265
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 10/14/2009

The juvenile court's order denying minor's request to reenter foster care was proper. In 2015, the Agency filed a section 300(g) petition on behalf of minor W.C., who was homeless. However, since W.C. turned 18 before the disposition hearing, the dependency petition was dismissed. W.C. did not appeal. In 2016, W.C. requested reentry pursuant to section 388(e), but the court denied reentry, as W.C. had never been a dependent of the court. The appellate court affirmed, finding that section 388(e) provides for reentry for a dependent or delinquent minor who has attained 18 for whom the…

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

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…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Andrae A.
Case #: B262556
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 10/15/2015

Where nonminor former dependent did not meet the eligibility requirement for further foster care services, the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion by failing to continue jurisdiction. Andrae was a dependent of the juvenile court and placed in foster care. At age 13, his caregiver requested he be removed because he had molested the caregiver's daughter. Andrae was then charged with lewd acts on a minor and placed in a new foster home. In 2012 he entered into a transitional independent living plan and placed with his grandmother. In 2013, he left the state. In 2014, at the age…

View Full Summary
Name: In re R.G.
Case #: A144684
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 09/30/2015

Juvenile court erred in denying nonminor dependent extended foster care support due to a narrow reading of the statute. R.G., a dependent minor, turned 18 in 2014, and elected to remain in extended foster care under AB 12 provisions. At a February 2015 review hearing, the juvenile court found that since R.G. had not worked a minimum of 20 hours per week or attended school during the previous six-month period, he was not in compliance with his transitional independent living plan (TILP) pursuant to section 11403, subdivision (b). R.G. argued that he was in compliance when he was…

View Full Summary