In re Andrea G. CA6
Filed 2/28/14 In re Andrea G. CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
In re ANDREA G. et al., Persons Coming H040071 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (San Benito County Super. Ct. No. JV0800035)
SAN BENITO COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
I.P.,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appellant I.P. (mother) appeals from the juvenile court’s orders terminating her parental rights to her daughters Andrea G. and Jasmine P. She contends that the juvenile court should have concluded that the parental relationship exception applied here and precluded termination of parental rights. We reject her contention and affirm the juvenile court’s orders.
I. Background In 2008, eight-year-old Jasmine was detained after she reported that mother had physically abused her on two separate occasions. On one occasion, mother slapped her
on the cheek. On the other occasion, mother threw Jasmine on a bed, causing her head to hit the headboard. Jasmine suffered a large bump on her head from this incident. The court took jurisdiction over Jasmine based on mother’s substance abuse and anger management problems, removed Jasmine from parental custody, placed her in foster care, 1 and granted mother reunification services. Mother had supervised visits with Jasmine twice a week, and she was attentive to and appropriate with Jasmine during these visits. Jasmine was happy in her foster home, and she “blossomed” after being placed there. Mother initially made little progress on her case plan, but the court continued her reunification services for a second six-month period. In late 2009, the court ordered that mother be allowed longer, unsupervised visits 2 after she made additional progress on her case plan. These unsupervised visits went well. Reunification services were continued for a third six-month period with the hope that Jasmine would soon be returned to mother’s care. In April 2010, mother was granted a 10-day extended visit with Jasmine. In May 2010, Jasmine was returned to mother’s care with family maintenance services. In October 2010, mother gave birth to Andrea. In November 2010, Jasmine’s 2008 dependency case was dismissed. In July 2011, Andrea was found unsupervised under a bed crying, with bags tied around her body, in a residence where the only adult was unconscious and under the influence. Mother was not present and could not be found. Jasmine was found at Andrea’s father’s parents’ home. Andrea and Jasmine were detained. Both mother and Andrea’s father were arrested for child endangerment. Mother subsequently told the social worker that she had left Andrea with her brother’s girlfriend overnight so that she
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)