In re G.S
Filed 3/2/06 In re G.S. CA2/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| In re G. S., A Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B187895 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK60484) |
| SHARI S., Petitioner, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Respondent; LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Real Party in Interest. | (Hon. Stephen Marpet) |
PETITION for Extraordinary Writ. Petition denied.
Alex Iglesias for Petitioner.
No appearance on behalf of Respondent.
Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Larry Cory, Assistant County Counsel, and William D. Thetford, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest.
INTRODUCTION
Shari S. filed the instant petition for extraordinary writ review (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 38.1) to challenge the orders of the juvenile court that sustained an amended petition and denied reunification services for her and six-month old G.S. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300 et seq.)[1] We deny the petition.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In September 2005, the Department of Children and Family Services (the Department) detained G. after learning that mother had moved from King County, Washington to Los Angeles to give birth to G. so that the baby would not be detained by the King County social services agency. Mother had a history of mental, emotional, and substance abuse problems which resulted in the removal by the King County authorities of six of mother's seven other children. Those children were adopted. Mother did not know the names of the Los Angeles area hotel where she was staying, the physician who gave her prenatal medical attention in Washington, or the delivering physician in Los Angeles. She stated she traveled to California to attend a funeral. When that appeared not to be true, mother stated she came to Los Angeles because her boyfriend had gotten a new job. That also turned out not to be true. Mother did not give her address to the social worker, but listed her mother's address in Shoreline, Washington. Mother planned to return to Shoreline, Washington; but changed her mind and decided to stay at the Union Rescue Mission in downtown Los Angeles.
Mother was present at the detention hearing and was appointed counsel. The juvenile court ordered mother to â€
