J.K. v. Super. Ct. CA5

Filed 8/27/13 J.K. v. Super. Ct. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

J.K., F067491 Petitioner, (Super. Ct. No. JP000639) v.

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MERCED OPINION COUNTY,

Respondent,

MERCED COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

Real Party in Interest.

THE COURT* ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for extraordinary writ review. Brian L. McCabe, Judge. J.K., in pro. per., for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. James N. Fincher, County Counsel, and Sheri L. Damon, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest. -ooOoo-

* Before Kane, Acting P.J., Detjen, J. and Franson, J.

INTRODUCTION Petitioner, J.K. (mother), filed an extraordinary writ petition (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452)1 in propria persona regarding her minor children, H.K. and S.K. (collectively “the minors”). Mother seeks relief from the juvenile court’s order issued at the status review hearing setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing.2 We will deny the petition. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A section 300 juvenile dependency petition regarding the minors was filed August 9, 2012. The next day the juvenile court conducted a detention hearing at which it found that allowing the minors to remain in the home of the parents would be contrary to their welfare and ordered that temporary placement and care of the minors be vested in the Merced County Human Services Agency (agency). At the time of this order, the minors were age 4 and age 2, respectively. On October 3, 2012, at the jurisdiction hearing, the juvenile court found the allegations of the petition true. On November 1, 2012, at the disposition hearing, the court made various findings, including that “there is a substantial danger to the physical health and safety, or physical or emotional well-being of the minors, or would be if the minors were returned home…, and the Court therefore makes findings pursuant to ... [section] 361[, subdivision] (c)(1) because [mother] continues to have an untreated substance abuse and mental health problem. In addition, [mother] continues to be non-compliant with the Court order[ed] drug screen.” The court declared each minor to be a dependent child of the juvenile court; placed the minors in the care, custody and control of the agency; ordered the agency to provide reunification services to mother; ordered mother to enter into a “Child