In re C.C. CA2/5

Filed 4/27/23 In re C.C. CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

In re C.C., et al., Persons Coming B315443 c/w B320655 Under Juvenile Court Law. _______________________________ (Los Angeles County Super. LOS ANGELES COUNTY Ct. No. 21CCJP02156A-B) DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

J.R.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Steff Padilla, Commissioner Presiding. Dismissed. Zaragoza Law Office and Gina Zaragoza for Defendant and Appellant. Dawyn R. Harrison, Interim County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel and Brian Mahler, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ___________________________

Father appeals the juvenile court’s order finding jurisdiction over his two young children and dispositional orders. Specifically, father challenges the (1) jurisdictional findings that his substance abuse placed the children at substantial risk of suffering serious physical harm, (2) dispositional order removing the children from his physical custody, and (3) six-month review findings that returning the children to parental custody would be detrimental to the children’s well-being. While this appeal was pending, the children were placed in father’s custody. We conclude that father’s jurisdictional challenge is nonjusticiable: jurisdiction was also based on mother’s drug use. Father’s appeal is moot as to the latter two challenges because the children are now in his custody. We therefore dismiss father’s appeal. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND At the inception of this dependency case, the children lived with their two half siblings, mother, and her boyfriend. Mother had prevented father from accessing the children, and father was seeking visitation orders through the family court. The family came to the attention of the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) when a half sibling tested positive for methamphetamine at birth. We do not further discuss the half siblings or the boyfriend as they are not relevant to our analysis. 1. Jurisdiction and Disposition On May 7, 2021, DCFS filed a Welfare and Institutions Code section 300 petition on behalf of the children.1 The petition alleged in separate counts that mother’s abuse of