In re A.P. CA2/6

Filed 8/27/15 In re A.P. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 A.P., A Person Coming Under the 2d Juv. No. B260161 Juvenile Court Law. (Super. Ct. No. J1395901) (Santa Barbara County)

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY CHILD WELFARE SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

AMANDA P.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Amanda P. (mother) appeals the juvenile court's orders denying her petition to reinstate family reunification services (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 388),1 terminating parental rights to her son, A.P., and selecting adoption as the permanent plan. (§ 366.26.) Mother contends (1) the court abused its discretion by denying her section 388 petition and (2) the beneficial parent-child relationship exception precludes the child's adoption. (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i).) We affirm.

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

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In April 2012, police discovered mother and A.P., who was then 16 months old, in a "makeshift" tarp-covered dwelling. Mother was under the influence of methamphetamine and in possession of drug paraphernalia. A.P. was sleeping in a stroller and wearing only a diaper. Police arrested mother, who had a criminal history of substance abuse and three prior referrals to Santa Barbara County Child Welfare Services (CWS) for drug use and general neglect. CWS filed a juvenile dependency petition to protect A.P. (§ 300, subds. (b), (g).) The juvenile court sustained the petition and ordered CWS to provide family reunification services. Between April and December 2012, mother completed inpatient substance abuse treatment, established a permanent residence, quit smoking, completed a parenting class and made significant improvement in therapy. At the 12-month review hearing, the juvenile court found mother had made excellent progress and placed A.P. in her care with family maintenance services. She had tested negative for drug use and was participating in 12-step and "safe care" programs, renting a room from friends and seeing a psychiatrist to treat her bipolar disorder. In November 2013, the court returned A.P. to her custody and terminated dependency jurisdiction. Five months later, CWS visited the family home after receiving three referrals alleging mother had relapsed into methamphetamine use. Mother was nervous, appeared to be under the influence and acknowledged her relapse. Mother said she was using methamphetamine with her boyfriend, who was present. CWS called the police, who arrested mother, and filed a new dependency petition on A.P.'s behalf. The juvenile court sustained the petition, bypassed family reunification services under section 361.5, subdivision (b)(13) and set a permanency hearing. A.P. was placed with foster parents who wish to adopt him. In the meantime, Mother pled no contest to a misdemeanor "under the influence" charge. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a).) The criminal court ordered her to undergo a six-month Proposition 36 (Prop. 36) outpatient substance abuse treatment program and to participate in Narcotics Anonymous (NA). Mother told her