Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County Nos. 510399, 510400, & 510401. Nancy B. Williamsen, Commissioner.
Leslie A. Barry, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Before Vartabedian, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Cornell, J.
OPINION
S.W. appeals from April 2009 orders terminating parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26) to her three children. Earlier this summer, appellant’s appointed appellate counsel informed this court by letter that counsel was not filing an opening brief for lack of any arguable issue (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952). By order filed July 29, 2009, this court extended time for appellant to personally file a letter brief on or before August 27, 2009. We added, “If no brief is filed within the time specified in this order or as extended for exceptional good cause, the appeal may be dismissed.”
All statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.
Appellant filed neither a letter brief nor an extension of time request within the time provided. On September 1, 2009, as this court prepared to dismiss the appeal accordingly, we received a letter from appellant dated August 26, 2009, and postmarked August 27, 2009. In it, she alleges different events have occurred since the trial court terminated her parental rights, which she apparently believes we should take into consideration. She does not attempt to explain her delay in responding to this court’s briefing order.
Even assuming exceptional good cause existed for appellant’s delay, the allegations she makes in her letter do not amount to claims that the juvenile court committed an error affecting the outcome of this case (In re Sade C., supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 994). Consequently, we will affirm.
An appealed-from judgment or order is presumed correct. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) It is up to appellant to raise claims of reversible error or other defect and present argument and authority on each point made. If appellant does not do so, the appeal should be dismissed. (In re Sade C., supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 994.) With no error or other defect claimed against the orders appealed from, we have no reason to reverse or even modify the orders in question. (Ibid.)
In addition, to the extent appellant argues about events which have occurred since the trial court ordered her rights terminated, we remind appellant it is not within our authority to consider such claims on appeal. An appeal reviews the correctness of a judgment as of the time of its rendition, upon a record of matters that were before the trial court for its consideration. (In re Zeth S. (2003) 31 Cal.4th 396, 405.)
DISPOSITION
The orders terminating parental rights are affirmed.