A.M. v. Superior Court CA5
Filed 11/29/22 A.M. v. Superior Court 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
A.M., F084867 Petitioner, (Super. Ct. No. 21CEJ300280) v.
THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FRESNO OPINION COUNTY,
Respondent;
FRESNO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES,
Real Party in Interest.
THE COURT * ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for extraordinary writ review. Todd Eilers, Commissioner. A.M. in pro. per. for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Daniel C. Cederborg, County Counsel, and Carlie M. Flaugher, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest. -ooOoo-
* Before Peña, Acting P. J., Smith, J. and DeSantos, J.
A.M. (mother) seeks extraordinary writ review (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 8.450– 8.452)1 of the juvenile court’s orders issued at a combined six- and 12-month review hearing (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.21, subds. (e)(1) & (f)(1))2 in August 2022, terminating reunification services and setting a section 366.26 hearing for December 21, 2022, as to her now 16-month-old daughter, Avery M. Mother seeks an order providing her reunification services and visitation or returning Avery to her custody. However, she fails to assert the juvenile court erred. Consequently, we conclude her writ petition fails to comply with the content requirements of rule 8.450 and dismiss the petition as facially inadequate for review. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL SUMMARY Newborn Avery was removed from mother’s custody in July 2021 by the Fresno County Department of Social Services (department) after amphetamine and methamphetamine were detected in her umbilical cord. The whereabouts of her alleged father, Christopher, were unknown and remained unknown. Avery was placed in a foster home. The juvenile court exercised its dependency jurisdiction over Avery at a combined jurisdiction/disposition hearing in September 2021, ordered mother to participate in reunification services and a minimum of two supervised visits a week and set a six-month review hearing for February 2022. The court denied Christopher reunification services. (§ 361.5, subd. (a).) In its report prepared in February 2022 for the six-month review hearing, the department recommended the juvenile court terminate mother’s reunification services and set a section 366.26 hearing. Although mother completed a parenting class and was participating in mental health therapy, she had not been assessed for substance abuse and
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)