Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for extraordinary writ review Super. Ct. No. JJV061610A. Charlotte A. Wittig, Juvenile Court Referee.
B.C., in pro. per., for Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent.
Kathleen Bales-Lange, County Counsel, and Konstantine A. Demiris, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party In Interest.
Before Harris, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Cornell, J.
OPINION
Petitioner, in pro. per., seeks an extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452 (rule 8.452)) to vacate the orders of the juvenile court terminating his reunification services and setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing as to his daughter C. We conclude his petition fails to comport with the procedural requirements of rule 8.452. Accordingly, we will dismiss the petition as facially inadequate.
All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
C. came to the attention of the Tulare County Health and Human Services Agency (agency) in January 2007 after her parents, petitioner and A.D., left her home alone in her crib. At the time, C. was 13 months old. The juvenile court sustained allegations petitioner and A.D.’s drug use placed C. at risk of harm and ordered the agency to provide them reunification services. Petitioner was ordered to participate in parenting instruction, counseling for anger management and substance abuse treatment. A.D. was ordered into residential drug treatment.
A.D. also filed a writ petition from these proceedings in case No. F053976.
In early May 2007, the agency placed C. with A.D. at the treatment facility. A week later, A.D. left the facility against medical advice, taking C. with her. As a result, the agency took C. into protective custody and filed a supplemental petition (§ 387) seeking her removal.
The juvenile court sustained the supplemental petition, continued services and set a six-month review hearing for September 2007. C. was placed with her maternal great aunt.
In June 2007, A.D. was arrested on outstanding warrants and not expected to be released from custody until January 2008. In September 2007, petitioner was involved in a head-on car collision and was in critical condition. In its six-month status report, the agency recommended the court terminate A.D.’s reunification services because of her incarceration and petitioner’s because of his noncompliance.
The six-month review hearing was continued, contested and conducted in October 2007. Petitioner and A.D. appeared through counsel. The court terminated their reunification services and set a hearing to consider a permanent plan.
DISCUSSION
Petitioner merely checks the boxes on the writ petition (JV-825) indicating that he wants continued services and custody of C. He explains that he is hospitalized but plans to recover at home with A.D. after his discharge from the hospital. He also indicates he is either recovering or will recover from drug abuse through drug court. For this court’s purposes, however, petitioner does not explain how the juvenile court erred in not returning C. to his custody or in terminating his reunification services. Consequently, the petition fails to comport with the content requirements for an extraordinary writ petition as set forth in rule 8.452 and precludes any meaningful appellate review.
Rule 8.452 specifies, inter alia, that the writ petition must include a summary of the significant facts and identify contested legal points with citation to legal authority and argument. (Rule 8.452(b).) At a minimum, the writ petition must “adequately inform the court of the issues presented, point out the factual support for them in the record, and offer argument and authorities that will assist the court in resolving the contested issues.” (Glen C. v. Superior Court (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 570, 583.) Because petitioner failed to comply with rule 8.452, his petition is inadequate for review and requires dismissal.
DISPOSITION
The petition for extraordinary writ is dismissed. This opinion is final forthwith as to this court.