In re Emmanuel C.
Filed 4/14/06 In re Emmanuel C. CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
| In re EMMANUEL C. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B185349 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK47816) |
| LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARIA B., Defendant and Appellant. |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Jan G. Levine, Judge. Reversed and remanded.
John Cahill, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Larry Cory, Assistant County Counsel, and Fred Klink, Senior Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
Maria B. (Mother) appeals from an order of the juvenile court terminating her parental rights to her sons, Emmanuel C. and Edgar C. Mother contends that, given the nature of her relationship with the children and the nature of the boys' relationship with their siblings, the juvenile court erred in failing to find applicable either of two exceptions which would have avoided termination of her parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(A) & (E).)[1] More specifically, Mother contends that the juvenile court erred by questioning Emmanuel in chambers with only his counsel present with regard to his feelings about his relationship with her and his siblings, and by not allowing Mother's counsel to be present or ask additional questions of Emmanuel. In addition, Mother urges that it was error that Edgar was not called to testify at all. We conclude that the procedure used by the juvenile court constituted error, that the error was prejudicial, and that reversal of the order terminating parental rights is required.
factual and procedural background
On February 28, 2002, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) filed a petition pursuant to section 300 regarding Yadira I. (born in January 1986), Estrella I. (born in January 1988), Hilario I., Jr. (hereafter â€
