In re Nadia H. CA2/6

Filed 8/21/14 In re Nadia H. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

In re NADIA H. and C. W., Persons 2d Juv. No. B253798 Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Super. Ct. Nos. J067930, J067931) (Ventura County)

HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

JENNIFER H. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

Jennifer H. (Mother) is the biological mother of C. W., born in December 2007, and Nadia H., born in June 2009. On January 16, 2014, the juvenile court entered an order terminating her parental rights and selecting adoption as the permanent plan for both minors. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.)1 Mother contends the juvenile court erred because she maintained regular visitation and contact with the children and they would benefit from continuing their relationship with her. (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i).) We affirm. Ricky H. (Father), Nadia's biological father, also filed a notice of appeal from the juvenile court's order terminating his parental rights. We appointed counsel to

1 All statutory references are to the Welfare & Institutions Code unless otherwise stated. 1

represent Father on appeal. On April 4, 2014, counsel filed a brief in which she informed us that she had found no arguable issues. On April 29, 2014, we notified Father that he had 30 days within which to submit any contentions he wished us to consider, and that the appeal would be dismissed in the absence of any arguable issues. Father has not presented any issues for our consideration. Consequently, the appeal filed by Father on January 21, 2014 is dismissed as abandoned. (In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, 844-845; In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.) Facts This dependency matter began in late August 2010 when Mother and Father were both arrested following an incident of domestic violence between them. The minors were placed in foster care where they remained until late October, 2010. On October 27, 2010, the juvenile court placed the minors in Mother's custody on the condition that Father could not live with them or have contact with the minors except under respondent's supervision. Mother complied with these restrictions and with her case plan which included classes in anger management, parenting and co-parenting. She also filed a petition for dissolution of her marriage to Father. On April 5, 2011, Mother was arrested for unlawful sex with a minor, a 16- year old male. She had also been involved in two more violent incidents with Father. The minors were again placed in foster care because Mother was in jail. In the detention report, respondent expressed concerns regarding Mother's "recent history of substance abuse." The minors remained in foster care for the remainder of 2011. In December 2011, after losing her job with the United States Navy, Mother enrolled in an in-patient substance abuse program and began attending weekly supervised visits with the minors. Both children appeared to be happy to see Mother and she was always loving and appropriate with them. In June 2011, the juvenile court terminated reunification services for Father based on his failure to comply with his case plan. Father continued to attend supervised visits with the children.