In re W.D. CA3
Filed 8/28/24 In re W.D. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin) ----
In re W.D., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile C099599 Court Law.
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES (Super. Ct. No. STK-JD-DP- AGENCY, 2023-0000069)
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
A.D.,
Defendant and Appellant.
A.D., father of minor W.D., appeals from the juvenile court’s jurisdictional and dispositional orders. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 300, 395.)1 Father contends that the juvenile court’s exercise of jurisdiction over minor is not supported by substantial evidence and that the court erred in removing minor from his custody. We affirm the orders.
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
1
BACKGROUND On February 16, 2023, the San Joaquin County Human Services Agency (Agency) filed a juvenile dependency petition regarding the three-month old minor, alleging a failure to protect under section 300, subdivision (b)(1). The petition alleged that mother, N.P., tested positive twice for benzodiazepines while minor was in her care. It alleged that mother shook, pinched, and screamed at minor while he was crying. It further alleged that mother had a long history of substance abuse issues and had failed to rehabilitate. With respect to father, the petition asserted that he had an extensive history of methamphetamine use that impaired his ability to care for minor and that he had failed or refused to rehabilitate. The Agency’s jurisdiction and detention report detailed information concerning mother’s care of minor. Minor was living with mother at a shelter with a residential program for substance abuse treatment. A mental health worker visited mother and reported concerns about her erratic behaviors. It was reported that mother was seen shaking and pinching minor because he was crying. The report also stated that, three weeks earlier, mother had left the shelter to obtain medical care at a local hospital. After being treated, she did not return to the shelter but instead asked father to pick her up and stayed out overnight. After returning to the shelter, mother tested positive for benzodiazepines. The social worker suspected that mother received drugs from father and that her erratic behaviors were related to her recent drug use. In May 2022, when she was pregnant with minor, mother tested positive for methamphetamine and other drugs. Mother also had an open case with child protective services related to her other children. When interviewed by a social worker, mother stated that her drugs of choice were methamphetamine and alcohol but that she had not used in nine months. Mother told the social worker that father had a history of methamphetamine use but was not using drugs
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)