Scott B. v. County of San Bernardino

Filed 3/22/06 Scott B. v. County of San Bernardino CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for extraordinary writ. James C. McGuire, Judge. Petition denied.

David M. Levy for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

Ronald D. Reitz, County Counsel, and Dawn M. Messer, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest.

Petitioner Scott B. (Father) is the father of seven‑month‑old Madison and her 17‑month‑old sister (Sister). Father filed this writ petition pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 38.1 challenging an order setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26^[1] permanency planning hearing as to Madison. On appeal, Father contends (1) the juvenile court erred in finding the jurisdictional allegations true, and (2) the juvenile court erred in allowing him to proceed in propria persona in Madison's siblings' case. For the reasons provided below, we reject Father's challenge and deny his petition.

I

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Mother^[2] and Father are an unmarried couple and are the biological parents of Madison and Sister. Mother also has a a six-year-old son (Brother) from a previous relationship. The family has had a long history of referrals to the San Bernardino County Department of Children's Services (DCS), including allegations of domestic violence, substance abuse, and mental illness. While in the hospital in premature labor with Sister, Mother tested positive for methamphetamine, and Father admitted to using methamphetamine. Later, at Sister's birth, Father came to the hospital with knives, and the police had to be called to remove him from the hospital due to his bizarre and aggressive behavior. As a result, in August 2004, Brother and Sister were removed from the parents' custody.

At a December 2, 2004, contested jurisdictional/dispositional hearing, Father and Mother waived their right to representation over the court's objection, and their counsel were relieved. The court then found the section 300 petitions on behalf of Sister and Brother true based on allegations of drug abuse, mental health concerns, and domestic violence. Father and Mother declined the court's offer to reappoint counsel for them for future hearings.

On June 3, 2005, the social worker recommended that parental rights as to Sister and Brother be terminated as the parents had failed to participate and complete their family reunification services. Additionally, the parents had continued to abuse methamphetamine and had repeatedly tested positive for drug use.

In February 2005, Mother and Father were evaluated by Dr. Nick Andonov. Mother presented herself as â€