In re N.M. CA5
Filed 4/20/21 In re N.M. CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
In re N.M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
TULARE COUNTY HEALTH AND F082081 HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, (Super. Ct. No. JJV059428) Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. OPINION ROSE M.,
Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Hugo J. Loza, Commissioner. Robert McLaughlin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Jennifer M. Flores, County Counsel, John A. Rozum and Amy-Marie Costa, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Meehan, J. and De Santos, J.
In this juvenile dependency case, Rose M. (mother) appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights as to her minor child, N.M. (Welf. & Inst. Code,1 § 366.26). Mother contends the order must be reversed because the court erred by failing to apply the beneficial parent-child relationship exception to termination of parental rights (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i)).2 Finding no error, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In April 2019, dependency jurisdiction was taken over then six-year-old N.M. under section 300, subdivisions (b)(1) (failure to protect) and (j) (abuse of siblings) due to mother’s substance abuse, instability in providing housing for N.M., mental health issues, and previous dependency proceedings arising from similar issues with N.M.’s sibling. N.M. was ordered removed from mother’s physical custody, and mother was ordered to participate in family reunification services, including mental health counseling, parenting classes, and substance abuse services. Over the course of the reunification period, mother was inconsistent with her participation in services and random drug testing. When she did drug test, she tested positive for illegal substances except for a brief period when she was incarcerated from approximately January 2020 through March 2020. Mother, however, was consistent with visits with N.M. Visits commonly consisted of mother and N.M. playing games and talking. N.M. and mother showed affection to one another by holding each other and giving each other hugs and kisses. At the end of visits, N.M. often became emotional, and after visits, she would display anger toward her care providers. As part of her case plan, N.M. participated in therapy and was diagnosed with adjustment disorder with anxious mood. N.M. consistently expressed worry about
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)