In re C.P. CA4/3

Filed 8/27/24 In re C.P. CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re C.P. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

ORANGE COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY, G063397 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 23DP0423, v. 23DP0424)

K.M., OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Lindsey E. Martinez, Judge. Motion to Dismiss. Granted. Request for Judicial Notice. Granted.

Mansi Thakkar, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Leon J. Page, County Counsel, Debbie Torrez and Aurelio Torre, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * * K.M. (Father) appeals from the juvenile court’s dispositional order granting B.P. (Mother) the primary share of parenting time of their children C.P. (6 years old) and V.M. (4 years old) (C.P. and V.M. are together referred to as the Children). The court found the Children came within its jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b)(1) (all undesignated statutory references are to this code). During the pendency of the appeal, the juvenile court terminated its jurisdiction, vesting legal and physical custody of the Children to Mother and Father. The primary residence of the Children was deemed to be with Father and scheduled visitation was ordered for Mother. The Orange County Social Services Agency (Agency) thereafter filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as moot. We agree the appeal is moot and decline to exercise our discretion to address Father’s challenges to the dispositional order and dismiss the appeal.1 FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Los Angeles County juvenile court found true, by a preponderance of the evidence, the allegations of the child welfare petition