Fear Not Law Articles: In re A.D.

In re A

In re A.D.

Filed 1/17/07 In re A.D. CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

In re A.D. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

N.M. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

C052119

(Super. Ct. Nos. JD221396, JD221397 & JD221398)

In re B.D., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

N.M. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

C052983

(Super. Ct. No. JD221398)

In case No. C052119, N.M. (mother) and D.D. (father), the parents of A.D., F.D., and B.D. (the minors), appeal from the juvenile court's orders terminating their parental rights as to A.D. and F.D. but continuing the selection and implementation hearing for B.D. In case No. C052983, they appeal from the juvenile court's order terminating their parental rights as to B.D. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395; further section references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise specified.) The appeals have been consolidated. For reasons that follow, we shall affirm the orders.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

B.D. was born in the Democratic Republic of Congo. A.D. and F.D. were born in Sacramento after mother's relocation there in 1998. Father came to Sacramento in 2002 after being granted political asylum in the United States. B.D. was united with the family in August 2004, following a separation of six years.

On November 2, 2004, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) filed juvenile dependency petitions on behalf of the minors, alleging in part that B.D. had suffered, or was at substantial risk of suffering, serious physical harm or illness as a result of acts of cruelty committed by mother and father (§ 300, subds. (a), (b), and (i)), which also placed A.D. and F.D. at substantial risk of suffering abuse or neglect. (§ 300, subd. (j).) The petitions alleged that mother and father had locked B.D. â€

Description	In case No. C052119, N.M. (mother) and D.D. (father), the parents of A.D., F.D., and B.D. (the minors), appeal from the juvenile courts orders terminating their parental rights as to A.D. and F.D. but continuing the selection and implementation hearing for B.D. In case No. C052983, they appeal from the juvenile court's order terminating their parental rights as to B.D. (Welf. and Inst. Code, SS 366.26, 395; further section references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise specified.) The appeals have been consolidated. For reasons that follow, court affirm the orders.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.