From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re G.S.R.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division
Mar 7, 2008
No. B197000 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 7, 2008)

Opinion


Page 562c

160 Cal.App.4th 562c __ Cal.Rptr.3d__ In re G.S.R., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. GERARDO R., Defendant and Appellant. B197000 California Court of Appeal, Second District, Eighth Division March 7, 2008

Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. JD01255

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING

THE COURT

That the opinion published on February 7, 2008, (159 Cal.App.4th 1202;___ Cal.Rptr.3d___ )in the above-captioned matter be modified as follows, and the petition for rehearing is DENIED:

1. On pages 14 and 15 [159 Cal.App.4th 1215, advance report, 3d full par.], in the final paragraph of heading 2., replace:

“Accordingly, we will reverse and remand with instructions that the trial court revisit the issue of whether, based on facts and circumstances as they exist at this time, there exist legally sufficient grounds to assert jurisdiction over the boys, recognizing poverty is not such a ground. If so, and the ICWA (discussed below) is deemed inapplicable, the juvenile court shall restart the clock on reunification services and related efforts, including housing assistance, to afford Gerardo a legitimate opportunity to build a relationship with and become a full-time parent to his sons. Only in the event those renewed efforts fail may the juvenile court proceed with termination of parental rights. If the trial court determines legitimate grounds for dependency jurisdiction do not currently exist, it shall take the necessary steps to assist the boys’ return to Gerardo’s custody.”

with:

“Accordingly, we will reverse and remand with instructions that the trial court revisit the issue of whether, based on facts and circumstances as they exist at this time, there exist legally sufficient grounds to find it would be detrimental to return the boys to Gerardo, recognizing poverty is not such a ground. If not, and the ICWA (discussed below) is deemed inapplicable, the juvenile court shall restart the clock on reunification services and related efforts, including housing assistance, to afford Gerardo a legitimate opportunity to build a relationship with and become a full-time parent to his sons.

Page 562d

Only in the event those renewed efforts fail may the juvenile court proceed with termination of parental rights. If the trial court determines it would not be detrimental to return the boys to Gerardo’s care, it shall take the necessary steps to assist the boys’ return to Gerardo’s custody.

2. On page 16 [159 Cal.App.4th 1216, advance report, 5th full par., first 4 sentences], the first four sentences of the Disposition, should now read:

“The order terminating Gerardo’s parental rights is reversed. The matter is remanded to the juvenile court with directions to conduct a hearing to address whether legally sufficient grounds independent of poverty currently exists such that it would be detrimental to place the boys to Gerardo’s care. If the juvenile court determines it would not be detrimental to do so, it shall take the necessary steps to return the boys to Gerardo’s custody. If the court determines detriment exists, it shall order DCFS to comply with the notice provisions of the ICWA.”

This modification effects a change in the judgment.


Summaries of

In re G.S.R.

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division
Mar 7, 2008
No. B197000 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 7, 2008)
Case details for

In re G.S.R.

Case Details

Full title:LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division

Date published: Mar 7, 2008

Citations

No. B197000 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 7, 2008)