Annette Rodriguez (age 24) has high functioning Autism.  A cheerful and opinionated young woman, Annette graduated from high school, works for PostMates, and lives semi-independently.  Annette needs some assistance with decision-making and with her daily routine.

Annette’s mother, Sylvia Campa, is an energetic advocate for Annette’s rights.  Sylvia works tirelessly to obtain legally mandated services from San Diego Regional Center (SDRC).

Following advice from SDRC, Sylvia petitioned the court for conservatorship over Annette as Annette approached her eighteenth birthday.  Many families report Regional Centers insist parents seek conservatorship, thus stripping basic civil rights from Regional Center clients.

In 2019, Sylvia pressured SDRC to provide services that Annette needed.  SDRC retaliated with an adverse report to Adult Protective Services, which led the court to suspend Sylvia from her role as Annette’s conservator.

On November 25, 2020, Judge Jeffery Bostwick appointed San Diego County Public Guardian as temporary conservator over Annette.  In the following months, the Public Guardian refused to communicate with Sylvia.  Documents indicate the Public Guardian neglected Annette, violated court orders, violated Probate Code, and threatened to isolate Annette.

On February 21, 2020, Annette fled the United States to her father’s home in Mexico.  The Public Guardian responded by threatening Sylvia with prosecution for kidnapping.

Conservatorship as Civil Death

Often called civil death, conservatorship is a legal instrument that gives a conservator nearly absolute power over all aspects of the conservatee’s life.
Congressman Claude Pepper made the following statement about conservatorship.

By appointing a [conservator], the court entrusts to someone else the power to choose where they will live, what medical treatment they will get and, in rare cases, when they will die.
It is … the most punitive civil penalty that can be levied against an American citizen…

Conservatorship prevents a person from hiring an attorney or seeking a civil remedy in court.   Many conservatees find themselves in the dilemma of having a court appointed attorney who opposes the conservatee’s wishes and basic civil rights.  Many conservatees are prevented from addressing the court to express their wishes or to report violations of their rights.

Allegation:  Public Guardian Neglected Annette

Relevant Law

Penal Code 368.5 provides the following definition of abuse.

Physical abuse, neglect, financial abuse, abandonment, isolation, abduction, or other treatment with resulting physical harm or pain or mental suffering; or the deprivation by a care custodian of goods or services that are necessary to avoid physical harm or mental suffering.  [Emphasis added)

Material Facts

On December 31, 2019, Sylvia sent the following email to Johanna Stafford at SDRC.

I am frustrated and frankly scared for my daughter’s safety. Annette relayed to the public guardian that she walked to 7-11 by herself recently.

On Feb 5, 2020, Sylvia sent a second, similar email to Johanna Stafford.

Just right now, Annette called me from her cell phone saying she was walking by herself along the street to the 7/11 to get food. That the SLS did not take her grocery shopping today…  My daughter is completely at risk, in the dark and on the street.

Allegation:  Public Guardian Violated Court Orders

Violating a court order is a misdemeanor.  The Public Guardian violated the court’s order to meet with Sylvia and to communicate with Sylvia.

Relevant Law

Penal Code 166(a) states the following.

(a) Except as provided in subdivisions (b), (c), and (d), a person guilty of any of the following contempts of court is guilty of a misdemeanor:
(1) Disorderly, contemptuous, or insolent behavior committed during the sitting of a court of justice, in the immediate view and presence of the court, and directly tending to interrupt its proceedings or to impair the respect due to its authority.
(4) Willful disobedience of the terms as written of any process or court order or out-of-state court order, lawfully issued by a court, including orders pending trial.

Material Facts

On January 6, 2020,  Judge Bostwick ordered the Public Guardian to have regular meetings with Sylvia and to communicate openly with Sylvia.  Judge Bostwick made the follow statement to Sylvia.

THE COURT:  I’m anxious that you and the public guardian meet together in addition to their meeting with the conservatee so that this communication flow is good. I would like to see that happen.

Judge Bostwick repeatedly admonished Deputy Public Guardian Lillian Flagg to communicate with Sylvia for Annette’s benefit.

THE COURT:  I’m suggesting that the public guardian be aware of Ms. Campa’s concerns and listen to those concerns. …
But at least having a regular meeting with her makes sense to the Court.
THE COURT:  It makes sense for me for the [Public Guardian] to also be talking to Ms. Campa to make sure that you don’t end up in court and all of a sudden there’s a laundry list of concerns that you’re first hearing about. Do you understand what I’m saying?
THE COURT:  Good communication is vital in this case. Vital. Everybody. Not in lieu of.  Comprehensively everybody, again.

Judge Bostwick directly instructed Flagg on meeting and communicating with Sylvia.
THE COURT: Have you sat down with Ms. Campa and gone over these things item by item or is this just the first time you’re hearing about her concerns?
MS. FLAGG: We have not sat down and gone through them.
THE COURT: Would it be easier to do that rather than have the Court somehow be the go-between of communication here?
MS. FLAGG: Sure.
THE COURT: In fact, wouldn’t it make sense for the public guardian to have a regular meeting with Ms. Campa, I mean, a scheduled regular at least monthly meeting with her?
THE COURT:  So we can head off a lot of concerns and complaints by getting the communication working, and the communication works when there’s regular scheduled meetings.
Sylvia reported that no one with the Public Guardian’s office met with her.  Prior to Annette fleeing the country, communication from the Public Guardian consisted of:

4 emails barking orders. 

Allegation:  Public Guardian Stated Intent to Violate Probate Code

Giving family less than 48 hours’ notice, Flagg stated her intent to remove Annette from her home and place Annette in a group home.