Legal Opinion

R.H. v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 21, 2012No. D061609PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HALLER, J.

R.H. and Darnell H., who had been designated as de facto parents and prospective adoptive parents for their granddaughter, L.S., seek writ review of juvenile court orders removing L.S. from their home under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, subdivision (n).1 Darnell *368contends he was denied due process because the juvenile court denied his and R.H.’s requests for appointed counsel in the underlying proceedings concerning L.S. R.H., who was represented by retained counsel, joins in Darnell’s contentions.2 We deny the petitions and deny the request for a stay of the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
  4. In Re Stephanie M.California Supreme Court · 1994
  5. In Re Marilyn HCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Olvera v. County of SacramentoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2013
  2. Sacramento County Department of Health & Human Services v. J.M.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  3. San Bernardino County Children & Family Services v. S.L.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  4. In re A.F.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  5. In re Esther M. CA2/8California Court of Appeal · 2016

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API