In re M.P. CA4/3
Filed 6/26/25 In re M.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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 M.P., A Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
ORANGE COUNTY SOCIAL G065106 SERVICES AGENCY, (Super. Ct. No. 22DP1527) Plaintiff and Respondent, OPINION v.
A.G. et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Lindsey E. Martinez, Judge. Affirmed. Neale B. Gold, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant A.G. John P. McCurley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant J.P.
Leon J. Page, County Counsel, Debbie Torrez and Deborah B. Morse, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * * A.G. (Mother) and J.P. (Father) (collectively “The parents”) appeal from the juvenile court’s order terminating their parental rights and placing minor M.P. for adoption following a Welfare and Institutions Code 1 section 366.26 hearing (366.26 hearing). The parents argue no substantial evidence supports the court’s finding that M.P. was specifically adoptable. We conclude Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) met its burden to show by clear and convincing evidence that M.P. was specifically adoptable. The juvenile court could rely on SSA’s reports to make its adoptability finding. Accordingly, we affirm. STATEMENT OF THE CASE On November 9, 2022, an emergency response social worker requested a non-custody petition based, in part, on concerns that the parents were neglecting M.P’s medical needs. M.P. was born premature, missing a right kidney, and suffering from a spinal anomaly and a rare heart defect. M.P. could not swallow and had to have a gastrointestinal (GI) tube inserted for feeding. SSA filed the petition on November 14, 2022, and at the November 15, 2022 hearing on the petition, the juvenile court conditionally ordered the minor to remain under the care of the parents. On November 18, 2022, M.P. was admitted to CHOC Children’s Hospital for a “very dirty” GI tube. Subsequently, SSA sought a warrant to remove M.P. from the parents’ custody, which the juvenile court granted. On
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)