§Why CasetextPricing

IN RE I.C.

Appellant’s Opening Brief on the Merits

33 Cited authorities

  1. Mathews v. Eldridge

    424 U.S. 319 (1976)   Cited 15,810 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a procedure based on written submissions was adequate because it included safeguards against mistake including that the agency informed the recipient of its tentative assessment and the evidence supporting it and an opportunity was then afforded the recipient to submit additional evidence "enabling him to challenge directly the accuracy of information in his file as well as the correctness of the agency's tentative conclusions"

  2. Santosky v. Kramer

    455 U.S. 745 (1982)   Cited 8,771 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"

  3. Davis v. Alaska

    415 U.S. 308 (1974)   Cited 5,700 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that this confrontation right is applicable to state and federal defendants alike

  4. Maryland v. Craig

    497 U.S. 836 (1990)   Cited 1,787 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants do not have an "absolute right to a face-to-face meeting with witnesses against them at trial"

  5. Idaho v. Wright

    497 U.S. 805 (1990)   Cited 1,694 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to have "particularized guarantees of trustworthiness," hearsay evidence "must possess indicia of reliability by virtue of its inherent trustworthiness, not by reference to other evidence at trial"

  6. California v. Green

    399 U.S. 149 (1970)   Cited 2,917 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the Confrontation Clause does not require excluding from evidence the prior statements of a witness who concedes making those statements"

  7. People v. Johnson

    26 Cal.3d 557 (Cal. 1980)   Cited 4,482 times
    Holding that an attorney may not waive a defendant's right to a speedy trial to accommodate the interests of other clients rather than benefit the defendant

  8. In re Savannah M.

    131 Cal.App.4th 1387 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 797 times
    Granting mother's motion to strike reference to post-appeal change in minors' placement

  9. In re J.K.

    174 Cal.App.4th 1426 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 607 times
    Holding proof of prior acts of physical or sexual abuse sufficient to support dependency jurisdiction, even in the absence of a showing of risk of future harm

  10. In re James R.

    176 Cal.App.4th 129 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 571 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"

  11. Section 1200 - Hearsay rule

    Cal. Evid. Code § 1200   Cited 2,209 times
    Prohibiting the introduction of "a statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated" subject to certain exceptions

  12. Section 1240 - Present sense impressions; excited utterances

    Cal. Evid. Code § 1240   Cited 877 times
    Discussing "the spontaneity of such statements and the consequent lack of opportunity for reflection"

  13. Section 1370 - Statement concerning inflicted or threatened physical injury upon declarant

    Cal. Evid. Code § 1370   Cited 120 times
    Identifying a nonexhaustive list of factors to consider in evaluating the trustworthiness of otherwise inadmissible statements from an unavailable declarant regarding the infliction or threat of physical injury upon the declarant

  14. Section 11169 - Forwarding of report to Department of Justice

    Cal. Pen. Code § 11169   Cited 105 times
    Reporting agency must notify the known or suspected child abuser that he or she has been reported to the index

  15. Section 1242 - Dying declarations

    Cal. Evid. Code § 1242   Cited 53 times

    Evidence of a statement made by a dying person respecting the cause and circumstances of his death is not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule if the statement was made upon his personal knowledge and under a sense of immediately impending death. Ca. Evid. Code § 1242 Enacted by Stats. 1965, Ch. 299.

  16. Rule 5.534 - General provisions, all proceedings

    Cal. R. 5.534   Cited 191 times

    (a) De facto parents On a sufficient showing the court may recognize the child's present or previous custodian as a de facto parent and grant him or her standing to participate a party in the dispositional hearing and any hearing thereafter at which the status of the dependent child is at issue. The de facto parent may: (1) Be present at the hearing; (2) Be represented by retained counsel or, at the discretion of the court, by appointed counsel; and (3) Present evidence. (Subd (a) relettered effective

  17. Rule 5.684 - Contested hearing on petition

    Cal. R. 5.684   Cited 103 times

    (a) Contested jurisdiction liearing (§ 355) If the parent or guardian denies the allegations of the petition, the court must hold a contested hearing and determine whether the allegations in the petition are true. (b) Admissibility of evidence, general (§§ 355, 355.1) Except as provided in sections 355(c) and 355.1 and (c) and (d) of this rule, the admission and exclusion of evidence must be in accordance with the Evidence Code as it applies to civil cases. (Subd (b) amended effective January 1,