In re K.M.
Filed 8/4/09 In re K.M. CA2/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
In re K.M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B214225 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. J969043) |
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. D.M., Defendant and Appellant. |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Emily Stevens, Judge. Dismissed by opinion.
Ernesto P. Rey, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance on behalf of Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * * * * *
D.M. (father), who is incarcerated, filed this appeal on February 13, 2009 from an order terminating his parental rights to his daughter, K.M. On April 28, 2009, fathers appointed appellate counsel filed a letter stating that after reviewing the record and researching potential issues, he was unable to file an opening brief on the merits on appellants behalf. The same day, we notified father that he had 30 days in which to submit by letter or brief any contentions or arguments he wished this court to consider. On May 29, 2009, father filed a letter, along with attachments, arguing that his paternal relatives should have been allowed to pursue adoption or guardianship of his daughter, who is in the process of being adopted by a foster parent. Under In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, we dismiss the appeal.
An appealed-from judgment or order is presumed correct. [Citation.] Hence, the appellant must make a challenge. In so doing, he must raise claims of reversible error or other defect [citation], and present argument and authority on each point made [citations]. If he does not, he may, in the courts discretion, be deemed to have abandoned his appeal. [Citation.] In that event, it may order dismissal. [Citation.] Such a result is appropriate here. With no error or other defect claimed against the orders appealed from, [we are] presented with no reason to proceed to the merits of any unraised pointsand, a fortiori, no reason to reverse or even modify the orders in question. [Citation.] (In re Sade C., supra, 13 Cal.4th at p. 994, fn. omitted.)
Having reviewed fathers letter and attachments, we conclude that he raises no issue we can recognize on appeal. Father complains that a social worker recommended in 2000 that the paternal grandmother not be allowed to pursue adoption of K.M. because she had not made any serious effort to visit or become acquainted with K.M. Father points out that K.M. has been placed with her prospective adoptive parent since 2004. Fathers time to appeal any placement order or decision regarding placement with persons other than paternal relatives has long since passed. Father does not otherwise provide any reasoned argument or authority as to why the courts order terminating his parental rights constituted reversible error. Therefore, we find that father has in effect abandoned his appeal, and, as permitted by In re Sade C., supra, 13 Cal.4th at page 994, we hereby dismiss the appeal.
DISPOSITION
The appeal filed February 13, 2009 is dismissed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
_____________________, J.
DOI TODD
We concur:
____________________________, P. J.
BOREN
____________________________, J.
ASHMANN-GERST
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
