Opinion
F052331
5-18-2007
WENDY W., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF STANISLAUS COUNTY, Respondent, STANISLAUS COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY, Real Party In Interest.
Wendy W., in pro. per., for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. No appearance for Real Party In Interest.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
OPINION
THE COURT
Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Levy, J., and Cornell, J.
Petitioner, in pro. per., seeks an extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.450-8.452) to vacate the orders of the juvenile court terminating her reunification services and setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing as to her daughter B. We will deny the petition.
All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
In April 2006, then three-month-old B. was detained at the hospital after being diagnosed with Shaken Baby Syndrome, malnutrition and a burn to the right foot. Petitioner, a prescription drug addict, had left B. in the care of her neighbors, Mr. and Mrs. P., also drug addicts.
Originally, Mr. P. claimed he was holding B. and making coffee when B. burned her foot on the coffeepot. Mr. P. lost his grip on B. and she fell to the floor, first landing on her buttocks and then on her head. However, after Mr. P. failed a polygraph test, he confessed to the examiner that he was throwing B. in the air to catch her and make her cry. On one throw, she hit her head on the ceiling and hit the ground. Mr. P. then intentionally burned B.s foot with a candle so that her injuries would support his original story.
In August 2006, at the dispositional hearing, the juvenile court exercised dependency jurisdiction over B. and removed her from petitioners custody after finding B. was a child described by section 300, subdivision (b). The court also ordered petitioner to participate in a six-month plan of reunification. Meanwhile, B. was placed in a specialized foster home because of the severity of her injuries and the extensiveness of her medical care plan.
Over the ensuing six months, petitioner failed to make progress in her reunification plan. Most notably, she did not regularly attend B.s medical appointments, missing several important ones and she continued to use drugs and declined residential drug treatment. Consequently, in its six-month status review, the social services agency (agency) recommended the court terminate reunification services and set a section 366.26 hearing to consider a permanent plan of adoption. On February 23, 2007, the court conducted a contested six-month review hearing and adopted the agencys recommendations.
DISCUSSION
Petitioner argues the juvenile court erred in removing B. from her custody because B. was not injured while in her care. To the extent petitioner is challenging the courts jurisdictional finding, adjudging B. a dependent child and/or its removal order, she waived her right to appellate review by not appealing from the courts jurisdictional findings and dispositional orders. (Steve J. v. Superior Court (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 798, 811-812.) Consequently, we will deny the petition.
DISPOSITION
The petition for extraordinary writ is denied. This opinion is final forthwith as to this court.