From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re K.E.

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
May 20, 2015
2d Juv. No. B260743 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 20, 2015)

Opinion

2d Juv. No. B260743

05-20-2015

In re K.E., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. VENTURA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. T.E., et al., Defendants and Appellants.

Nancy Rabin Brucker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant T.E. Patricia K. Saucier, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant G.C. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115 . (Super. Ct. Nos. J069602, J069603)
(Ventura County)

T.E. (mother) appeals the juvenile court's order terminating parental rights to her minor children K.E. and L.E. and selecting adoption as the permanent plan. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) G.C. (father), the presumed father of L.E., appeals the same order as to L.E. only. Both parents also appeal the denial of their petitions to modify the court's prior order bypassing reunification services. (§ 388.) We appointed counsel to represent them on appeal.

All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

On February 23, 2015, counsel for father filed a brief in which she informed us that she had found no arguable issues. On April 1, 2015, mother's counsel filed a brief raising no issues. We subsequently notified mother and father that they had 30 days within which to submit any contentions they wished us to consider, and that their appeals would be dismissed as abandoned in the absence of any arguable issues. Neither parent has presented any issues for the court's consideration.

Because no claim of error or other defect has been raised in this matter, father's appeal filed on December 16, 2014, and mother's appeal filed on December 22, 2014, are dismissed as abandoned. (In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, 844-845; In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.)

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

PERREN, J. We concur:

GILBERT, P. J.

YEGAN, J.

Bruce A. Young, Judge


Superior Court County of Ventura

Nancy Rabin Brucker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant T.E.

Patricia K. Saucier, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant G.C.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


Summaries of

In re K.E.

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
May 20, 2015
2d Juv. No. B260743 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 20, 2015)
Case details for

In re K.E.

Case Details

Full title:In re K.E., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. VENTURA…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX

Date published: May 20, 2015

Citations

2d Juv. No. B260743 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 20, 2015)