San Diego Cnty. Health & Human Servs. Agency v. Marianne C. (In re M.)

Full title: In re XAVIER M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. SAN DIEGO…

Court: COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Dec 23, 2011

D060360 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 2011)

Opinion

D060360

12-23-2011

In re XAVIER M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. SAN DIEGO COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MARIANNE C. et al., Defendants and Appellants.

BENKE

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(Super. Ct. No. J517814)

APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Peter Fagan, Juvenile Court Referee. Dismissed.

Marianne C. and Troy M. appeal findings and orders entered at a permanency plan and selection hearing held pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Marianne also appeals a summary denial of her petition for modification under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 (the Hon. Carol Isackson, presiding). Citing In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, they ask this court to exercise its discretion to review the record for error.

In In re Sade C., the California Supreme Court held that review pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 is unavailable in "an indigent parent's appeal from a judgment or order, obtained by the state, adversely affecting his [or her] custody of a child or his [or her] status as the child's parent." (In re Sade C., supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 959.) We therefore deny appellants' requests to review the record for error and to address the Anders issues. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738.)

Through counsel, Marianne and Troy ask this court to order counsel to brief any arguable issues. (Penson v. Ohio (1988) 488 U.S. 75, 88.) Citing In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, counsel also asks this court to exercise its discretion to provide their clients the opportunity to file a supplemental brief in propria persona. The requests are denied.

DISPOSITION

The appeals are dismissed.

_____________

BENKE, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:

_____________

McDONALD, J.

_____________

IRION, J.