Supreme Court of California

The Court of Appeal erred in receiving and considering post-judgment evidence, presented for the first time through the unsworn statements of the minor's appointed appellate counsel in a letter brief, and in further relying on that evidence to reverse the juvenile court's order and judgment terminating parental rights.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/04/2003
• Published 08/04/2003

Judges

• BAXTER, J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Melissa A. Chaitin, Los Angeles, under appointment by the Supreme Court, for Minor., William Wesley Patton, Costa Mesa, for Whittier Law School Legal Policy Clinic as Amicus Curiae., Robert C. Fellmeth;  Shannan Wilber, San Francisco;  Janet G. Sherwood, Corte Madera, and Donna Furth, San Francisco, for Children's Advocacy Institute of the University of San Diego School of Law, Legal Services for Children and the Northern California Association of Counsel for Children as Amici Curiae., Kenneth P. Sherman, Lisa E. Mandel and Anne E. Fraggasso for Dependency Court Legal Services, Inc., as Amicus Curiae.


• For Appellees:
  
•  Rich Pfeiffer, Tustin, and Jennifer Mack, under appointments by the Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant., Laurence M. Watson and Benjamin P. deMayo, County Counsel, Robert G. Overby, Julie J. Agin, Deborah M. Gmeiner and Rachel M. Bavis, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent., Law Office of Harold LaFlamme, Craig E. Arthur and Karen Cianfrani, Orange, for Dependency Children in the County of Orange and Trial Attorneys for Zeth S. as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent., John J. Sansone, County Counsel (San Diego), Susan Strom, Chief Deputy County Counsel, Gary C. Seiser, Deputy County Counsel;  and Ruth Sorensen, Alturas, for California State Association of Counties and County of San Diego as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent.