In re M.S. CA3

Filed 10/5/23 In re M.S. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin) ----

In re M.S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court C097530 Law.

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES (Super. Ct. No. AGENCY, STK-JD-DP-2021-0000164)

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

D.S.,

Defendant and Appellant.

D.S., mother of minor M.S., appeals from the juvenile court’s orders on a Welfare and Institutions Code section 387 supplemental petition.1 She contends the juvenile court

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

1

erred in sustaining the section 387 petition because the allegations formed new legal theories or factual bases for removal and, in any event, substantial evidence did not support the allegations. She also contends the orders must be reversed because the juvenile court did not make findings under sections 342 and 356 as is required, she argues, to base removal on new jurisdictional bases. In addition to reversal of the jurisdictional orders on the section 387 petition, she seeks reversal of the subsequent dispositional findings and orders, including the removal of the minor from her home. Approximately four months after the juvenile court’s entry of the section 387 dispositional orders, the juvenile court ordered the minor returned to mother’s home and dismissed the dependency with orders granting mother full custody of the minor. Mother did not appeal from these orders and expressly states she does not request this court reverse or vacate those orders. Following the principles described in In re D.P. (2023) 14 Cal.5th 266 (D.P.), we conclude the subsequent orders returning the minor to mother and dismissing the dependency have rendered mother’s appeal moot, and we decline to exercise our discretion to decide the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On April 27, 2021, San Joaquin County Human Services Agency (the Agency) filed section 300 petitions on behalf of minor M.S. and her sibling, I.S. (who is not a subject of this appeal), based on failure to protect as to both children, serious emotional damage as to I.S., and abuse of sibling as to minor M.S. (§ 300, subds. (b), (c) & (j).) The petitions were based primarily on the father’s verbal and emotional abuse of I.S., the maternal aunt’s verbal and physical abuse of I.S., mother’s failure and/or inability to protect I.S. from abuse, and the parents’ failure to provide a safe living environment. The juvenile court sustained the petition and declared minor M.S. a dependent child of the court. Although her sibling was removed, the juvenile court authorized minor M.S. to remain in the home with family maintenance services.