Legal Opinion
County of Orange v. Roy Z.
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 11, 1986No. G003426PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SONENSHINE, J.
Roy and Mitsue Z.’s minor son Nathaniel became a ward of the court pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 1 and was placed on probation. Nathaniel was again taken into custody after violating the terms of his probation. At the detention hearing, he was released pursuant to a home supervision plan (HSP). After the HSP was terminated, probation again commenced. Nathaniel admitted the probation violation. His 40-day commitment was stayed. Probation ended and the wardship terminated.
The County of Orange successfully petitioned the court to order the parents to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Department of Mental Hygiene v. KirchnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- In Re Jerald C.California Supreme Court · 1984
- County of Merced v. DominguezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. Tyrell J.California Supreme Court · 1994
- People v. Binh L.California Court of Appeal · 1992
- People v. Tyrell J.California Supreme Court · 1994
- In re M.W.California Court of Appeal · 2021