Fear Not Law Articles: In re Johnny G.

In re Johnny G

In re Johnny G.

Filed 2/6/07 In re Johnny G. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re JOHNNY G. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

MADERA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

PATRICIA C.,

Defendant and Appellant.

F050517

(Super. Ct. Nos. BJP015814, BJP015815 & BJP015816)

OPINION

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Nancy C. Staggs, Commissioner.

Carol A. Koenig, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

David A. Prentice, County Counsel, Miranda Neal, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

Procedural Summary

On January 12, 2006, 14-year-old Veronica V., who lived with her maternal grandmother and legal guardian, appellant Patricia C., reported to her noncustodial father that she had been raped by 18-year-old Peter C., who also lived in the home. Patricia C. is the legal guardian of Veronica and her two siblings, 15-year-old Johnny G. and five-year-old Corina R. Peter is the nephew of Patricia's ex-husband, Richard C.

Veronica reported that Peter had forced her to have sexual intercourse three times during the course of a weekend. As a result of Veronica's report, all three siblings were removed from Patricia's home by respondent Madera County Department of Public Welfare (department). The department filed a petition alleging that the three children were minors within the definition of Welfare and Institutions Code^{^[1]} section 300, subdivisions (b), (d) and (j). The detention hearing was held on January 20, 2006. The juvenile court found a prima facie showing that the children were minors subject to dependency jurisdiction. A contested jurisdictional hearing was held on March 28, 2006. The juvenile court sustained the allegations of the petition, after amending the petition according to proof:

â€

Description	The allegations of paragraph d-3, "Patricia [C.], the guardian and maternal grandmother of Veronica [V.], has failed to adequately protect Veronica from being sexually abused in that, after learning that Veronica [V.] and her other granddaughter were sexually abused she allowed the perpetrator to remain in the home," were not sustained. The identity of the "other granddaughter" is unclear and neither party raises any issue related to the allegations of paragraph d-3 on appeal. At the dispositional hearing, the court found by clear and convincing evidence that there was a substantial danger to the physical health, safety, protection, or physical or emotional well being of each of the three children if they were returned to Patricia's home. The court also found there were no reasonable means to protect the children's physical health without removing them from Patricia's custody, and that reasonable efforts had been made to prevent the need for removal. As a result, Johnny was placed in the home of his noncustodial parent, who was given physical and legal custody of him; Patricia's guardianship was terminated. Corina and Veronica's placements were left to the department's discretion. Patricia appeals from the jurisdictional and dispositional orders of the court. The jurisdictional and dispositional orders of the juvenile court are reversed.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.