29 Cited authorities

  1. Santosky v. Kramer

    455 U.S. 745 (1982)   Cited 8,703 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[b]efore a State may sever ... the rights of parents in their natural child, due process requires that the State support its allegations by at least clear and convincing evidence"
  2. People v. Gutierrez

    58 Cal.4th 1354 (Cal. 2014)   Cited 1,127 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that construing a sentencing statute as establishing "a presumption in favor of life without parole [for juvenile homicide offenders] raises serious constitutional concerns under the reasoning of Miller and the body of precedent upon which Miller relied"
  3. In re Jasmon O

    8 Cal.4th 398 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 1,324 times
    Finding "substantial new evidence" to support the juvenile courts "decision to set aside the previous order as not in the best interests of the child"
  4. In re Rocco M.

    1 Cal.App.4th 814 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 1,322 times
    Finding "guidance" in this language for determining what constitutes a substantial risk of serious harm under subdivision (b)
  5. In re James R.

    176 Cal.App.4th 129 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 568 times
    Reversing juvenile court's jurisdiction finding because "[a]lthough [mother] had a history of mental instability, she had not abused or neglected the minors in the past"
  6. Cynthia D. v. Superior Court

    5 Cal.4th 242 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 863 times
    Upholding the preponderance standard of proof in juvenile court findings in termination of parental rights hearings against due process challenge
  7. In re Jason J.

    175 Cal.App.4th 922 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 475 times
    Affirming order terminating parental rights despite evidence that father was "affectionate and appropriate" with son, son was comfortable with father and called him "Daddy," because there was "no evidence" that boy "has the type of emotional attachment to [father] that would cause him to be greatly harmed if parental rights were terminated"
  8. In re Daisy H.

    192 Cal.App.4th 713 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 411 times
    Holding that evidence the father had assaulted the mother “at least two, and probably seven, years before the [Department] filed the petition” was insufficient “to support a finding that ... domestic violence between the parents placed the children at a current substantial risk of physical harm”
  9. In re Henry V.

    119 Cal.App.4th 522 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 476 times
    Reversing removal order where child was removed for single, serious incident of physical abuse; social worker testified about in-home services that could mitigate risk of further physical abuse, including unannounced visits, public health nursing services, and in-home counseling, and mother was "fully cooperative"
  10. In re Nolan W.

    45 Cal.4th 1217 (Cal. 2009)   Cited 382 times
    Interpreting § 1219 as authorizing an indefinite period of incarceration to coerce compliance with a court order
  11. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 337 times

    (a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer