legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re E.R. CA4/2
This case concerns defendant and appellant, D.M. (father), and his teenage daughter, E.R., who was 13 years old when this case began in May 2015. In April 2017, the juvenile court appointed legal guardians for E.R. and terminated dependency jurisdiction. Father appeals from this order and raises only one argument: his counsel was ineffective because she failed to request presumed father status. We affirm. Father fails to establish counsel’s performance was deficient or that her performance prejudiced him.

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