HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-JV-0084-2002IN THE MATTER OF
L.M.
BORN: JULY 2, 1997
A DEPENDENT JUVENILE
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. CP - 21 JUVENILE 0084 - 2002
IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO Pa. R.A.P. 1925
Guido, J., September ,2004
L.M. was found to be dependent on April 10, 2002. While there was an allegation
that he had been sexually abused by his father, the decision on dependency was based
upon numerous other factors. Since services were in place and the safety of the child was
assured, we were prepared to defer our decision on the allegations of sexual abuse. ~
However, father insisted that we address those allegations. Consequently, on October 30,
2002 we found by clear and convincing evidence that father had sexually abused the
child.
Our finding was based in large part upon the testimony of the child's mother,
which we found to be credible. However, during our extensive involvement with this
"family" over the next 18 months, it became clear to us that the mother is an inveterate
liar and that our reliance upon her testimony had been misplaced. In April of this year,
during one of the numerous hearings we have had in this matter, we articulated our belief
that our finding of sexual abuse had been in error. Subsequently, father filed a petition
requesting that we reconsider our October 30, 2002 order.2 We asked father's counsel to
provide us with authority in support of his request. We were specifically interested in our
1 See our Order of October 30, 2002.
2 No appeal was taken from this order.
ability to modify the order after such a lengthy period of time. While counsel filed a
lengthy brief citing the obvious equitable considerations, he did not address the thirty
(30) day time limitation to modify orders set forth in 42 Pa. C.S.A. {} 5505. Nor did he
address the Superior Court's determination that the time frames set forth in 42 Pa. C.S.A.
{} 5505 are jurisdictional. As that court specifically stated: "the trial court is without
jurisdiction to modify or rescind its order beyond the 30 day limitation set by 42 Pa.
C.S.A. {} 5505." InRe T.T., 842 A.2d 962, 964 (2004).
Based upon the above cited law, we were satisfied that we had no jurisdiction to
modify our order of October 30, 2002.
do so.
Consequently, we denied appellant's request to
By the Court,
Lindsay Dare Baird, Esquire
Dirk Berry, Esquire
Lisa M. Greason, Esquire
Jacqueline M. Verney, Esquire
Galen Waltz, Esquire
Juvenile Probation
CCC&Y
:sld
Edward E. Guido, J.