Opinion
F066303
05-09-2013
In re C.Y., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. TULARE COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. K.K., Defendant and Appellant.
Christopher Blake, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. Nos. JJV065639A, JJV065639B,
JJV065639C)
OPINION
THE COURT
Before Levy, Acting P.J., Kane, J., and Poochigian, J.
APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Jennifer Shirk, Judge.
Christopher Blake, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
K.K. (mother) appealed from a 2012 order terminating parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26) to her three preschool-age children. After reviewing the entire record, mother's court-appointed appellate counsel informed this court he could find no arguable issues to raise on mother's behalf. Counsel requested and this court granted leave for mother to personally file a letter setting forth a good cause showing that an arguable issue of reversible error did exist. (In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, 844.)
All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.
--------
Mother has now submitted a letter in which she asks for reconsideration and expresses her love for her children.
Mother's letter neither addresses the termination proceedings nor sets forth a good cause showing that any arguable issue of reversible error at the termination hearing does exist. (In re Phoenix H., supra, 47 Cal.4th at p. 844.) An appealed-from judgment or order is presumed correct. (Denham v. Superior Court (1970) 2 Cal.3d 557, 564.) It is up to an appellant to raise claims of reversible error or other defect and present argument and authority on each point made. If an appellant does not do so, the appeal should be dismissed. (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.)
DISPOSITION
This appeal is dismissed.