From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Daniel B.

California Court of Appeals, Fifth District
Mar 21, 2011
No. F060767 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 21, 2011)

Opinion

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of King County. George Orndoff, Judge., Super. Ct. No. 08JD0080

Kathleen Murphy Mallinger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Colleen Carlson, County Counsel, and Bryan Walters, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.


THE COURT

Before Levy, Acting P.J., Cornell, J., and Gomes, J.

Rose B. (mother) appeals from an order terminating parental rights to her three sons. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) She joins in an argument made by the children’s father in his appeal, In re Daniel B. (case no. F060840). The father challenged the juvenile court’s denial of a request he made pursuant to section 388 to reinstate reunification services for him. We concluded that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion by denying father’s request. There were neither changed circumstances nor any showing that reunification services for father at the permanency planning phase would promote the children’s best interests.

All statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.

Because mother in her appeal raises no independent claim of error, we conclude the court properly terminated parental rights.

DISPOSITION

The order terminating parental rights is affirmed.


Summaries of

In re Daniel B.

California Court of Appeals, Fifth District
Mar 21, 2011
No. F060767 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 21, 2011)
Case details for

In re Daniel B.

Case Details

Full title:In re DANIEL B., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. v…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fifth District

Date published: Mar 21, 2011

Citations

No. F060767 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 21, 2011)