legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re J.M. CA4/2
K.B., the mother of J.M. (hereafter mother), appeals an order terminating her parental rights and freeing J.M. for adoption. She contends that her due process rights were violated because she was “without question . . . a fit parent” at the time of the section 366.26 hearing and because the minor’s attorney “advis[ed] the social worker to violate clearly established law.” We conclude that appellate review of the “fitness” issue was forfeited by mother’s failure to file a petition for extraordinary writ review, as mandated by section 366.26, subdivision (l) (hereafter § 366.26(l)), following the 18-month review hearing. Mother’s contention concerning the alleged attorney misconduct, which occurred during the 12-month review hearing, could have been addressed by an appeal following that hearing and is also not cognizable in the current appeal. Moreover, the issue was not preserved for appeal in any event.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale