You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

AKKIKO M. v. Superior Court

Citations: 163 Cal. App. 3d 525; 209 Cal. Rptr. 568; 1985 Cal. App. LEXIS 1515Docket: A027068

Court: California Court of Appeal; January 11, 1985; California; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves a minor, a dependent of the juvenile court, contesting the removal of her chosen legal representation by Legal Services for Children, Inc. The minor became a dependent in 1978 due to unsuitable home conditions and was not initially provided independent legal representation. Recent proceedings regarding her voluntary commitment and conservatorship led her to seek representation from Legal Services for Children. Despite being found not gravely disabled by a jury, the Department of Social Services sought to exclude this legal service from representing her, arguing a conflict with her guardian ad litem. The juvenile court erred by removing the minor's chosen counsel without evaluating her capacity to select competent representation. The court is mandated under Welfare and Institutions Codes Sections 317 and 318 to appoint separate counsel for minors in abuse or neglect cases to ensure their rights are protected. Section 349 allows minors to choose their own counsel. The court's decision to recuse Legal Services was reversed, and a writ of mandate was issued to reconsider the minor's request for representation by competent counsel, reflecting her right to counsel of her choice if deemed competent.

Legal Issues Addressed

Court's Duty to Protect Minor's Interests

Application: The court is responsible for protecting a minor's interests by appointing counsel at detention hearings and ensuring continuity of representation unless validly changed.

Reasoning: Section 318 mandates the appointment of counsel at the detention hearing, with ongoing representation unless changed by the court.

Minor's Right to Choose Counsel under Section 349

Application: The minor argued for the right to select her own counsel without age restrictions, which the court must honor if the minor is competent and the chosen counsel meets legal requirements.

Reasoning: Akkiko argued that under section 349 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, she had the right to choose her counsel without age restrictions...

Right to Counsel under Welfare and Institutions Code Section 317

Application: The court must appoint separate counsel for minors in cases of abuse or neglect, ensuring representation during critical stages such as detention hearings.

Reasoning: Sections 317 and 318 require the appointment of separate counsel for minors in cases of abuse or neglect, ensuring the minor's rights are upheld during critical stages, such as detention hearings, which must occur promptly after a petition is filed.

Role of Guardian Ad Litem and Counsel

Application: The guardian ad litem's role is not to control legal representation but to meet federal requirements, and the independent counsel is intended to represent the child's interests.

Reasoning: The Department's claim that it controls litigation as guardian ad litem for an abused or neglected minor is rejected; independent counsel is intended to represent the child's interests.

Substitution of Counsel

Application: A minor may request substitution of counsel, and the court must assess and approve if the minor is competent and the new counsel is qualified.

Reasoning: Substitution of counsel is permitted if the minor is competent to choose and the new counsel meets the requirements of section 318.