 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re B.H.3/24/2003
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
Appellants, the mother and father of the minor, appeal from the juvenile court's order terminating their parental rights. (Welfare and Institutions Code, ยงยง 366.26, 395.) Appellants contend that the juvenile court erred by denying a continuance of the section 366.26 hearing and that there was insufficient evidence of the minor's adoptability. The father also argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel. We shall affirm the juvenile court's order.
Facts and Procedural History
A dependency petition was filed in February 2001 concerning the six-week-old minor under section 300, subdivisions (a) (serious harm inflicted nonaccidentally by a parent), (b) (substantial risk of serious harm resulting from parent's substance abuse and failure to protect) and (e) (child under five years old suffered severe physical abuse by a parent or the parent reasonably should have known another person was physically abusing the child). The petition alleged that the minor had "received severe physical injuries inflicted nonaccidentally resulting in a condition consistent with haken aby yndrome." The petition also alleged that the mother had been unable to adequately supervise the minor as a result of her substance abuse, as evidenced by two positive tests for methamphetamine while she was pregnant with the minor. The petition was later amended to add that the "father contends the [minor's] injuries were the result of a seizure [and the] injuries were exacerbated by medical malpractice."
According to the jurisdictional report, the mother told a nurse at the hospital that the father had been watching the minor while she was out, and when she returned, the minor was lying on a bed unresponsive and not breathing. The mother took the minor to a health care center, where an ambulance was called. At the hospital, the examining physician concluded that the minor, who was comatose, was suffering from shaken baby syndrome and would have permanent, severe brain damage. A CAT scan showed swelling of the minor's brain, which was consistent with the diagnosis, as was the minor's "extreme" retina damage. The minor had "puffy, slightly bruised and swollen" eyes, a small bruise on her forehead and two small scratches above her ear. The examining physician stated that the minor was not a typical shaken baby because, normally, bruising is visible on the front and back of the brain from the head being hit against an object. The physician believed the minor had been shaken "to the point that went into respiratory arrest."
The father admitted shaking the minor on the morning she was taken to the hospital, explaining he did so "because she had stopped breathing due to breathing her own vomit." The father was arrested on a charge of felony child abuse.
The mother reported that the minor was "colicky and screams a lot" and that the father sometimes handled her "too rough," although she did not think he had hurt her. The mother admitted that she also became "extremely upset" at times from the minor's constant crying and the stress in the home. The mother reported that the father "gets very upset and it causes a lot of stress around the house." The mother felt it was "`fishy'" that the father would not stay at the hospital after the minor's admission, because he was "Mr. Mom about 99% of the time." She also said it concerned her that the father would "
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|