In re C.W. CA1/5

Filed 7/2/24 In re C.W. CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

In re C.W., A168827 A Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Humboldt County ___________________________________ Super. Ct. No. JV2300069) HUMBOLDT COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent, v. K.W., Defendant and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 K.W. (mother) appeals from the juvenile court’s dispositional order which removed C.W. from her custody pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 361, subdivision (c)(1). Mother’s appointed counsel on appeal filed a brief pursuant to In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952 and

1 We resolve this case by memorandum opinion because it raises no

substantial issue of fact or law. (Cal. Stds. Jud. Admin., § 8.1.)

1

In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, stating that she found no arguable issues. After mother submitted a supplemental brief, we issued an order finding that she “made a showing of good cause that there is an arguable issue” and requested supplemental briefing on whether mother was “deprived of effective assistance of counsel based on her counsel’s failure to object to the admission of a video depicting [her] smoking a white powder before she testified or on the ground that the video was recorded in violation of Penal Code section 632.” After reviewing the supplemental briefing, we now dismiss the appeal as untimely. Moreover, even if we did reach the merits of the one arguable issue raised by mother, we would affirm. On April 17, 2023, respondent Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services (Department) filed a juvenile dependency petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300 on behalf of then 22-month-old C.W. The petition alleged that C.W. was “at substantial risk of serious physical harm” because mother was using and exposing C.W. to illegal substances. Mother allegedly “used methamphetamine in the child’s presence multiple times.” C.W.’s father also admitted to using methamphetamine and fentanyl. A “bulbous pipe with white residue” was found in C.W.’s diaper bag, and each parent claimed that it belonged to the other parent. In its detention report, the Department noted that it had received a video that father had recorded on his phone showing mother “holding a bulbous pipe,” lighting it, and blowing out smoke while C.W. was in the same room. At the detention hearing, mother was appointed counsel and denied the allegations in the petition. The juvenile court issued a detention order removing C.W. from mother’s custody and requiring hair follicle testing for C.W. Mother also agreed to submit to a hair follicle test.