Skip to content
Name: In re Jonathan C.M.
Case #: A165931
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 05/18/2023

The juvenile court erred when it terminated transition jurisdiction over nonminor without considering his best interests. The nonminor suffered from autism, ADHD, and other mental health and developmental conditions and suffered a chaotic childhood characterized by neglect, abuse, and homelessness. While he was already a dependent of the juvenile court, he was committed to a Youthful Offender Treatment Program in juvenile hall. The nonminor was eligible for AB12 services upon release, and when wardship was terminated the court continued jurisdiction over him as a nonminor dependent. Nonminor struggled to maintain compliance with the program, refusing to tell probation where he…

View Full Summary
Name: In re M.W.
Case #: E068981
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 08/30/2018

The foster mother's status as a former caregiver did not disqualify her home as a supervised independent living placement. Dependency jurisdiction over the 19-year-old nonminor dependent, M.W., was terminated by the juvenile court in August, 2017. The juvenile court terminated jurisdiction over M.W. because he had moved in with a former foster parent, and the court believed that a former caregiver's home did not qualify as a "supervised independent living placement" (SILP). On appeal, M.W. contended that the juvenile court erred because he wanted to remain in extended foster care and living with a former caregiver did not…

View Full Summary
Name: In re H.C.
Case #: D072368
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 12/04/2017

Eighteen-year-old nonminor's marriage did not prevent her from receiving services in an extended foster care program. After H.C. turned 18, the juvenile court continued H.C.'s dependency case as a nonminor dependent in extended foster care. She was residing in an approved placement, and was pregnant. She believed her abusive boyfriend Alonzo to be the baby's father. Six months later, the Agency discovered that H.C. had married Alonzo and was living with him. The Agency set a special hearing to request that the juvenile court terminate H.C.'s dependency case, arguing that her marriage made her…

View Full Summary
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: 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
Name: In re Aaron S.
Case #: H040684
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/26/2015

The court may terminate jurisdiction for a minor who makes only minimal efforts to participate in an independent living case plan. Aaron was a dependent of the court beginning at age 16. At age 18, he failed to enroll in college, was unemployed, and refused offers of job search assistance from the Department. The Department recommended termination of jurisdiction and the court followed that recommendation. On appeal, Aaron argued that the juvenile court abused its discretion in finding that he was not participating in his transitional independent living case plan. He argued that his unsuccessful attempts to enroll in college…

View Full Summary
Name: In re J.C.
Case #: G048720
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 01/17/2014

A mother who does not have custody and is not receiving reunification services does not have standing to challenge the juvenile court's termination of dependency jurisdiction of her 18-year-old daughter. The dependent minor, who had been in father's custody, was removed because father neglected her schooling and psychiatric care. When the minor turned 18, she was informed of her right to continue as a dependent until the age of 21. She declined the offer, choosing to have dependency jurisdiction terminated so she could return to her father. The juvenile court terminated jurisdiction, and mother appealed, contending that the trial court…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Shannon M.
Case #: A136730
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 11/06/2013

Juvenile court erred when it terminated dependency jurisdiction over an 18-year-old dependent who was returned to her mother's custody but then abandoned by mother. Shannon was returned to her mother's care just before her 18th birthday and abandoned by her mother shortly after she turned 18. The Department asked the court to terminate dependency jurisdiction. Shannon objected, contending that the court had to first consider whether that was in her best interest. The juvenile court terminated dependency, and the appellate court reversed. The juvenile court erred in relying on section 364, which governs the termination of jurisdiction after a…

View Full Summary