Opinion
F083286
03-04-2022
In re JEREMIAH H., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. v. J.H., Defendant and Appellant. KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent,
Elaine Forrester, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kern County. No. JD140921-00 Marcos R. Camacho, Judge.
Elaine Forrester, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
THE COURT[*]
Appellant J.H. (mother) appealed from the juvenile court's September 9, 2021, order terminating her parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26) to her now 10-month-old son, Jeremiah H. After reviewing the juvenile court record, mother's court-appointed counsel informed this court she could find no arguable issues to raise on mother's behalf. This court granted mother leave to personally file a letter setting forth a good cause showing that an arguable issue of reversible error exists. (In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, 844 (Phoenix H.).)
Statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
Mother filed a letter but failed to address the termination findings or orders or set forth a good cause showing that any arguable issue of reversible error arose from the section 366.26 hearing. (Phoenix H., supra, 47 Cal.4th at p. 844.) Consequently, we dismiss the appeal.
PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL SUMMARY
In July 2020, the juvenile court exercised its dependency jurisdiction over then three-month-old Jeremiah under section 300, subdivision (b)(1) after sustaining allegations mother tested positive for phencyclidine (PCP) and amphetamine the day before Jeremiah's birth, had a seven-year history of using amphetamine and a five-year history of using PCP and had two other children in guardianship with family members because of her substance abuse. The court ordered Jeremiah removed from parental custody and ordered the Kern County Department of Human Services (department) to provide mother counseling for substance abuse, anger management and parenting and twice weekly supervised visits. The court also ordered mother to submit to random drug testing. The court did not order services for Jeremiah's alleged father. The court set a six-month review hearing for January 28, 2021.
The department recommended the juvenile court terminate mother's reunification services. She completed a parenting class and enrolled in substance abuse and anger management counseling. However, she was dropped from substance abuse and anger management counseling for poor attendance and had to reenroll. It was also reported that she failed to regularly submit to random drug testing. She tested positive for PCP, amphetamine and methamphetamine in August and November 2020.
Mother did not visit Jeremiah regularly and the quality of visits was "limited." During a visit in August 2020, mother appeared to be under the influence of a substance and the visit was terminated after 30 minutes.
On January 28, 2021, mother's attorney asked the juvenile court to appoint a guardian ad litem (GAL) for mother. The court set a hearing on February 2, 2021, to determine whether mother needed a GAL. At the hearing, the court appointed a GAL for mother and set a six-month review hearing for March 4, 2021.
Mother's attorney argued at the six-month review hearing that the juvenile court should continue reunification services for mother because the mental health services provided were inadequate. The court disagreed, concluding that mother sufficiently understood what was required of her to complete her services plan as demonstrated by the fact that she had successfully completed a parenting class. The court believed mother's struggle was with drug addiction, which she had not addressed. The court found there was not a substantial probability mother could reunify if provided additional time. The court terminated reunification services and set a section 366.26 hearing for June 30, 2021. Mother did not seek extraordinary writ review of the court's order setting a section 366.26 hearing.
The department recommended the juvenile court find that Jeremiah was likely to be adopted and terminate parental rights.
On June 30, 2021, the juvenile court continued the section 366.26 hearing to September 9, 2021. Mother was sworn and asked whether Jeremiah should be freed for adoption. She objected to his adoption, explaining that he already had a mother and she needed a little more time to reunify. She said she loved Jeremiah. Following mother's testimony, her attorney argued for legal guardianship as a permanent plan for Jeremiah rather than adoption.
The juvenile court found Jeremiah was likely to be adopted and terminated parental rights.
DISCUSSION
An appealed-from judgment or order is presumed correct. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) It is the appellant's burden to raise claims of reversible error or other defect and present argument and authority on each point made. If the appellant fails to do so, the appeal may be dismissed. (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.)
At a termination hearing, the juvenile court's focus is on whether it is likely the child will be adopted and if so, the court is required to order termination of parental rights. (In re Marilyn H. (1993) 5 Cal.4th 295, 309.) If, as in this case, the child is likely to be adopted, the juvenile court must terminate parental rights unless the parent proves there is a compelling reason for finding that termination would be detrimental to the child under any of the circumstances listed in section 366.26, subdivision (c)(1)(B).
Mother does not argue the juvenile court erred in finding Jeremiah was likely to be adopted or that the court should have found an exception to adoption applied. Rather, she describes in detail services she claims to have participated in and completed subsequent to the section 366.26 hearing. We, however, are precluded from considering evidence that was not considered by the juvenile court. (In re Zeth S. (2003) 31 Cal.4th 396, 405.) Even if we could consider it, it is irrelevant to whether Jeremiah is adoptable and whether an exception to adoption applies.
Since mother does not challenge the juvenile court's findings at the termination hearing, we conclude she failed to set forth a good cause showing that an arguable issue of reversible error arose from the court's order terminating her parental rights. Further, though we are not required to do so, we have reviewed the record as it relates to the termination hearing and have found no arguable issues for briefing. (Phoenix H., supra, 47 Cal.4th at pp. 841-842.) Consequently, we dismiss the appeal.
DISPOSITION
This appeal is dismissed.
[*] Before Poochigian, Acting P. J., Detjen, J. and Franson, J.