Opinion
F042832.
7-15-2003
MARIE O., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COUNTY OF MERCED, Respondent, MERCED COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Real Party in Interest.
Marie O., in pro. per., for Petitioner. No appearance, for Respondent. Ruben E. Castillo, County Counsel, and David A. Olsen, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest.
Petitioner, in pro. per., seeks extraordinary writ review (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26, subd. (l); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 39.1B) of respondent courts order that a section 366.26 hearing be held on July 29, 2003, as to her infant son. We will deny the petition.
All statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
In February 2002, petitioners then five-month-old son, J., was hospitalized for respiratory problems. Hospital staff reported that petitioner was belligerent and appeared to be under the influence of drugs. The social services agency took J. into protective custody and filed a dependency petition on his behalf. (§ 300, subdivision (b).) The juvenile court subsequently sustained allegations petitioners drug use placed J. at risk of harm and ordered a plan of reunification. After 12 months of services, the court terminated reunification services for noncompliance and set the matter for permanency planning.
DISCUSSION
Petitioner acknowledges she failed to comply with her case plan and she does not claim juvenile court error. Rather, she informs this court she is participating in parenting and recovery classes and requests continued reunification services. Extraordinary writ proceedings pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 39.1B (rule) are appropriate where the petitioner seeks to challenge the orders and findings of the juvenile court. (Rule 39.1B(b).) Since petitioner does not claim juvenile court error, her petition for extraordinary writ is not properly before this court. However, to the extent petitioner seeks to modify the juvenile courts order terminating reunification services, she may do so by way of a section 388 petition.
Section 388 allows the parent of a child adjudged a dependent of the juvenile court to petition the court to change, modify or set aside any order upon grounds of change of circumstance or new evidence.
DISPOSITION
The petition for extraordinary writ is denied. This opinion is final forthwith as to this court.