In re B.P.
Filed 6/2/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
In re B.P. et al., Persons Coming Under Juvenile Court Law. B303804
LOS ANGELES COUNTY (Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN Super. Ct. No. AND FAMILY SERVICES, 19CCJP00228A–C)
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
D.S.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Jana M. Seng, Judge. Dismissed. Suzanne Davidson for Defendant and Appellant. Mary C. Wickham, County Counsel, Kristine P. Miles, Assistant County Counsel, and William D. Thetford, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ___________________________
D.S. (mother) appeals a detention order based on a subsequent dependency petition filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 342.1 Respondent Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) has moved to dismiss the appeal because the detention order based on a section 342 petition is interlocutory and not appealable. We agree. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. BACKGROUND On February 28, 2019, the juvenile court sustained an initial section 300 petition alleging mother’s three children, B.P., I.P., and M.M., were at risk of serious physical harm because mother was unable to address B.P.’s mental health and behavioral issues. DCFS did not seek to detain the children from mother. Mother agreed to a court-ordered case plan. The court held a six-month review hearing on August 28, 2019, and based on reports mother had been using methamphetamine, the court ordered her to submit to on demand drug testing. It continued jurisdiction to the 12-month review hearing. A few weeks later on September 20, 2019, DCFS filed a section 387 supplemental petition alleging the prior disposition was ineffective. It requested the court detain the children from mother. At a hearing on October 28, 2019, the court denied the detention request and again ordered mother to drug test monthly. Mother started exhibiting signs of domestic violence and drug abuse, and DCFS received a report she was using drugs in the children’s presence. She also missed a drug test. On
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)