In re Z.H. CA1/3

Filed 1/13/25 In re Z.H. CA1/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re Z.H. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

SONOMA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, A170347 v. (Sonoma County Super. Ct. Nos. K.L., 24JD00006, 24JD00007) Defendant and Appellant.

Minors Z.H. and L.H.1 were taken from their parents’ custody based on allegations that the parents had unresolved substance abuse problems. The juvenile court took jurisdiction under section 300, subdivisions (b) and (g) of the Welfare and Institutions Code (further unspecified statutory references are to this code) and entered a disposition order declaring the children dependents of the court and ordering reunification services to the presumed

1 Minors share the same hyphenated combination of surnames that begin with the initials H and C, but the record and briefing do not consistently use the same surname initials for each child. For consistency, and with no disrespect intended, we use the first surname initial (H) for both of them.

1

father, S.H. (Father), but bypassing reunification services to mother, K.L. (Mother). On appeal, Mother contends the juvenile court erred because (1) the Sonoma County Department of Social Services (Department) failed to make “active efforts” to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family, as required under the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) and related California law (§ 361.7); and (2) reunification with Mother was in the children’s best interests. While the appeal was pending, the juvenile court granted Mother’s modification petition under section 388 and ordered that she receive reunification services with the children. Because Mother has received the relief she seeks in this appeal, we agree with the Department that the appeal is moot and grant its motion to dismiss the appeal. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On January 9, 2024, the Department filed a dependency petition on behalf of Z.H. (aged 3) and L.H. (newborn) pursuant to section 300, subdivisions (b)(1), and (g), alleging the children have suffered or were at substantial risk of suffering serious physical harm or illness due to substance abuse by Mother and Father. The petition further alleged that Mother had a long history of treatment-resistant substance abuse, that she had misused substances during her pregnancies with both children, and that she had recently failed to appear for a scheduled intake appointment to enter residential treatment at Women’s Recovery Services (WRS). Mother was arrested on January 4, 2024, and held without bail for probation violations and new drug use-related charges. Father also allegedly struggled with substance abuse and had not taken adequate steps to protect the children and meet their basic needs.