In re M.M. CA5

Filed 12/6/24 In re M.M. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re M.M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN F088172 SERVICES, (Super. Ct. No. JD145369-00) Plaintiff and Appellant,

v. OPINION S.M.,

Defendant and Respondent.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kern County. Susan M. Gill, Judge. Margo A. Raison, County Counsel, and Ana M. Ovando, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Appellant. Paul A. Swiller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Peña, Acting P. J., Smith, J. and Snauffer, J.

At issue in this case is the juvenile court’s order offering family reunification services to S.M. (Mother). The Kern County Department of Human Services (Department) appeals, contending the court erred. We affirm. BACKGROUND When Mother gave birth to the child at the center of this case, Mother tested positive for numerous illicit drugs. Mother’s history with using those drugs is longstanding and well documented. The Department swiftly detained the newborn child and filed a juvenile dependency petition, alleging Mother failed to protect the newborn, and Mother previously and similarly lost custody of another child due to drug abuse in a different dependency case. (Welf. & Inst. Code,1 § 300, subds. (b)(1) & (j).) No family reunification services were ordered in that case. Specifically, the juvenile dependency petition explained “[M]other’s ongoing substance abuse place[d] the [newborn] at risk.” At the disposition hearing, Mother testified she, in her prior case involving the other child, was addicted to drugs. She sought treatment then, but “relaps[ed]” because she could not continue to “afford” treatment. Relative to the newborn, Mother testified she quit using drugs “on [her] own free will.” She was also enrolled in treatment and regularly attended “N[arcotics] A[nonymous] meetings ….” She acknowledged “the last time [she] used any illegal substance” was after the petition was filed in this case, but was then-currently “111 days clean.” The juvenile court found Mother had “a long history of substance abuse, but” also that she “show[ed] the fortitude, … willpower, [and] intelligence” to analyze “her substance abuse[.]” It stated it was “so impressed with … [M]other” as she could “articulate why she wasn’t successful [in treatment] before.” It believed, “with a high