In re K.M. CA2/3

California Court of Appeal Sep 8, 2020 No. B302421Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the juvenile court's orders sustaining a supplemental petition and removing the children from the mother's custody, finding substantial evidence that the previous disposition was ineffective and the children remained at risk.

Issues

Whether substantial evidence supported the juvenile court's finding that the previous disposition was ineffective in protecting the children.
Whether the juvenile court erred in finding that the children would face substantial danger if returned to the mother's custody.
Whether the Department of Children and Family Services failed to provide reasonable services to the mother.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The only fact necessary to modify a previous placement is that the previous disposition has not been effective in protecting the child[ren].”

“The evidence supports the juvenile court’s finding that the factual allegations of the supplemental petition were true and that the previous disposition was ineffective in protecting the children.”

Filed 9/4/20 In re K.M. CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

In re K.M. et al., Persons B302421 Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY (Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF Super. Ct. CHILDREN AND FAMILY Nos. 19LJJP00310A, SERVICES, 19LJJP00310B)

Plaintiff and Respondent,

TIFFANY M.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Steven E. Ipson, Judge Pro Tempore. Affirmed. Jamie A. Moran, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Mary C. Wickham, County Counsel, Kristine P. Miles, Assistant County Counsel, and William D. Thetford, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. —————————— This is the second appeal brought by T.M. (mother) in the dependency of her two daughters (ages 10 and 7). Mother’s earlier appeal challenged the orders taking jurisdiction over the children and for formal rather than informal supervision by the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). While the first appeal was pending, the juvenile court sustained a supplemental petition (Welf. & Inst. Code,1 § 387) and removed the children from mother’s custody (§ 361, subd. (c)). This appeal challenges these new orders. We affirm. BACKGROUND

I. The family2 The family’s home was filthy, smelled foul, and was infested with cockroaches falling from the walls and into the children’s food as they ate. Mother, who suffered from multiple sclerosis, and maternal grandmother who was obese, were both bedridden, leaving the children unsupervised. Soon, mother decided to educate the girls at home, further reducing their supervision. Older daughter changed grandmother’s diaper at least three times a day and regularly administered medication to both women. A plastic tub full of those drugs sat at the foot of

In re K.M. CA2/3

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

TIFFANY M.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DHANIDINA, J.

EDMON, P. J.

LAVIN, J.

AI Brief