Michelle B. v. Super. Ct. CA5
Filed 12/18/13 Michelle B. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
MICHELLE B., F068102 Petitioner, (Super. Ct. No. JP000454) v.
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MERCED COUNTY,
Respondent;
MERCED COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,
Real Party in Interest. JOHN B., F068103 Petitioner, (Super. Ct. No. JP000454) 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. John D. Kirihara, Judge. Michelle B., in pro. per., for Petitioner. John B., in pro. per., for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. James N. Fincher, County Counsel, Sheri L. Damon, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest. -ooOoo- Petitioners John B. and Michelle B., in propria persona, seek an extraordinary writ from the juvenile court’s orders issued at a contested 12-month review hearing (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.21, subd. (f))1 terminating their reunification services and setting a section 366.26 hearing as to their seven-year-old daughter, D.B.2 They contend they substantially completed their reunification services and therefore the juvenile court erred in terminating them. They further contend their reunification services were inadequate and their due process and civil rights were violated. They seek an order returning D.B. to their custody. We deny the petition. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL SUMMARY In September 2011, a social worker from the Merced County Human Services Agency (agency) and a police officer responded to a report that John and Michelle, husband and wife, were mentally unstable and unable to care for Michelle’s six-year-old
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)