J-S09001-20 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 IN THE INTEREST OF: K.S., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA : : APPEAL OF: K.S., A MINOR : : : : : No. 3238 EDA 2019 Appeal from the Order Entered October 31, 2019 In the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County Juvenile Division at No(s): No. CP-23-DP-48-2019 BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., LAZARUS, J., and COLINS, J.* MEMORANDUM BY SHOGAN, J.: FILED MARCH 27, 2020 Appellant, K.S., a minor,1 appeals from the October 31, 2019 order that denied his application to file a private petition for dependency pursuant to Pa.R.J.C.P. 1320. After review, we affirm, albeit on separate grounds.2 The record reflects that on March 25, 2019, Attorney Daniel G. Anna, counsel for K.S., filed a petition for dependency pursuant to Pa.R.J.C.P. 1330 (“the Petition”). The Petition requested that the trial court adjudicate K.S., a native of India, who was born in November of 2001, a dependent child. On ____________________________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. 1 As noted in our discussion and relevant to our decision, although K.S. was a minor when the underlying proceedings began, he has since attained the age of majority. 2 We may affirm the trial court’s disposition “on any correct basis.” Rambo v. Greene, 906 A.2d 1232, 1235 n.4 (Pa. Super. 2006). J-S09001-20 April 9, 2019, the trial court scheduled a hearing on the matter. In the interim, Attorney Anna recognized that the Petition was improper. Because Attorney Anna did not represent the Delaware County Children and Youth Services (“CYS”), he was required to file an application to file a private petition. See Pa.R.J.C.P. 1330, cmt. (“Any other person, other than the county agency, is to file an application to file a petition under Rule 1320.”). On July 22, 2019, Attorney Anna filed an application to file a private petition (“the Application”). In the Application, Attorney Anna alleged K.S. was a dependent child pursuant to Section 6302 of the Pennsylvania Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6301-6375 (“the Juvenile Act”). The Application, 7/22/19, at ¶¶ 2-4. Attorney Anna noted that a cousin, B.S.,3 was K.S.’s caretaker while K.S. was in the United States. Id. at ¶ 5. Nevertheless, in the Application, Attorney Anna expressed concern that K.S. could potentially fall victim to “human trafficking.” Id. Attorney Anna averred that K.S. comes within the jurisdiction of the trial court under the Juvenile Act because K.S. was abandoned by his parents and is without a parent, guardian, or legal custodian under 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302. Id. at ¶ 3 (incorporating the Petition by reference). However, Attorney Anna requested that B.S. remain K.S.’s ____________________________________________ 3 Throughout the record, B.S. is referred to both as K.S.’s uncle or cousin. Order, 10/31/19, at ¶ 2. However, B.S. testified that K.S.’s paternal grandmother and B.S.’s mother are sisters; thus, K.S. is B.S.’s first cousin once removed. Id. at ¶ 9 (citing N.T., 9/12/19, at 23). -2- J-S09001-20 caretaker and that placement remain with B.S. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals