In re Elijah C. CA2/6

Filed 11/17/14 In re Elijah C. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ELIJAH C., a Person Coming Under 2d Juv. No. B254919 the Juvenile Court Law. (Super. Ct. No. J69112) (Ventura County)

VENTURA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

Petitioner and Respondent,

v.

E.C.,

Objector and Appellant.

E.C. (mother) and Keith R. (father) appeal from an order terminating their parental rights to their son, Elijah C. (child), and selecting adoption as the permanent plan. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.)1 Mother contends that the juvenile court erroneously failed to apply the beneficial relationship and sibling relationship exceptions to the termination of her parental rights. (§ 366.26, subds. (c)(1)(B)(i), (c)(1)(B)(v).) Father's appointed counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835. Counsel found no arguable issues and requested that father be permitted to personally file a supplemental opening brief. We deny the request because there has been no "showing

1 All statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

of good cause that an arguable issue does, in fact, exist." (Id., at p. 844.) We dismiss father's appeal. As to mother, we affirm. Background Child was born in June 2012 and is now two years old. Child has a serious congenital heart defect that requires either "a series of three open heart procedures or a heart transplant." Child's medical team decided that he would have the three surgical procedures. Child had the first surgery shortly after birth. In November 2012, when child was five months old, a juvenile dependency petition was filed. The petition alleged that mother "has not followed through with the necessary medical appointments" and that "child continues to lose weight and has had to be hospitalized to monitor his situation due to the mother's failure to follow medical direction." The petition further alleged that father "lives out of state and is unable to provide adequate care for the child's medical[] needs." The day after the petition was filed, the child was ordered to be detained out of mother's home. In March 2013 the petition was sustained after an uncontested hearing. The juvenile court declared child to be a dependent of the court. It ordered that custody of the child be removed from the parents and that family reunification services be provided to mother. In September 2013 the court terminated reunification services and set the matter for a section 366.26 hearing. Beneficial Relationship Exception "By the time of a section 366.26 hearing, the parent's interest in reunification is no longer an issue and the child's interest in a stable and permanent placement is paramount. [Citations.] . . . The child has a compelling right 'to [have] a placement that is stable, permanent, and that allows the caretaker to make a full emotional commitment to the child.' [Citation.] Adoption is the Legislature's first choice because it gives the child the best chance at such a commitment from a responsible caretaker. [Citations .]" (In re Jasmine D. (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 1339, 1348.) "If the court finds that a child may not be returned to his or her parent and is likely to be adopted, it must select adoption as the permanent plan unless it finds that