In re J.D. CA4/3

Filed 7/10/23 In re J.D. CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re J.D., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

ORANGE COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY, G062034 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 19DP0001) v. OPINION C.P.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Robert Gerard, Judge. Motion to Dismiss Appeal. Granted. C.P., in pro. per, for Defendant and Appellant. Leon J. Page, County Counsel, Karen L. Christensen and Aurelio Torre, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *

C. P. is the maternal grandmother of J.D., who is the subject of these dependency proceedings. C.P. appeals from an order denying her request to change court order under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 (section 388) by which she sought an order stopping an adoption hearing, resuming reunification services, recognizing her relationship to J.D., and permitting her to visit J.D. The Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground it became moot upon the finalization of J.D.’s adoption and termination of dependency jurisdiction. We invited C.P. to file opposition to the motion. She did not file opposition. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal as moot. An appeal may become moot when subsequent events, including orders by the juvenile court, make it impossible for the reviewing court to grant effective relief. (In re Albert G. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 132, 134-135.) “As a general rule, an order terminating juvenile court jurisdiction renders an appeal from a previous order in the dependency proceedings moot.” (In re C.C. (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 1481, 1488.) More specifically, the adoption of a dependent child and termination of dependency jurisdiction render moot an appeal from an order denying a section 388 petition requesting the juvenile court to return a child to a former caretaker’s custody. (In re Albert G., at pp. 134-135.) In Albert G., the Court of Appeal held the completion of the dependent child’s adoption rendered moot the maternal aunt’s appeal from denial of a section 388 petition seeking return of the child to the aunt’s custody. The child’s “adoption meant the trial court could not grant the change appellant sought in her petition, and also means there is no remedy we could grant on appeal.” (In re Albert G., at p. 135.)