Conservatorship of Karen T. CA3

Filed 10/28/15 Conservatorship of Karen T. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----

Conservatorship of the Person and Estate of KAREN T. C077259

BUTTE COUNTY PUBLIC GUARDIAN, as (Super. Ct. No. PR39794) Conservator, etc.,

Petitioner and Respondent,

v.

KAREN T.,

Objector and Appellant.

Karen T. challenges the reappointment of a conservatorship under the Lanterman- Petris-Short Act (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5000 et seq.; hereafter LPS Act),1 contending the evidence was insufficient to support the trial court’s finding she was gravely disabled and

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

1

the imposition of special disabilities. Because the one-year LPS Act conservatorship has terminated by operation of law, we dismiss the appeal as moot. BACKGROUND Karen was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. In February 2011, she agreed to be placed in a LPS Act conservatorship under section 5350. The trial court reappointed the conservator in March 2012 and again in April 2013. The county sought reappointment of the conservator for a fourth time in April 2014. Following a contested trial on July 28, 2014, the trial court found Karen was gravely disabled and again placed her in conservatorship. The trial court also imposed special disabilities, restricting Karen from: having a driver’s license; entering contracts; refusing medical treatment related to her grave disability; and possessing a firearm. Karen filed a notice of appeal on August 22, 2014. The case was fully briefed on June 22, 2015. On July 28, 2015, the conservatorship terminated by operation of law. We requested supplemental briefing on whether Karen’s appeal has been rendered moot. DISCUSSION An appellate court decides only actual controversies and, thus, will not render opinions on moot questions that cannot affect the matter on appeal. (Giles v. Horn (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 206, 226-227; Frias v. Superior Court (1975) 51 Cal.App.3d 919, 923.) Accordingly, if events subsequent to the judgment or order appealed from prevent the appellate court from granting any effectual relief, and the appeal does not raise any issue of continuing public interest likely to recur, the court must dismiss the appeal as moot. (Lester v. Lennane (2000) 84 Cal.App.4th 536, 566; In re Robert A. (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 174, 181-182.) Under the LPS Act, “a conservator . . . may be appointed for a person who is gravely disabled as a result of a mental health disorder . . . .” (§ 5350.) A person is “gravely disabled” if he or she, “as a result of a mental health disorder, is unable to provide for his or her basic personal needs for food, clothing, or shelter.” (§ 5008, subd.