In re V.V.
Filed 8/20/10 Certified for partial publication 9/8/10 (order attached)
IN THE COURT OF
APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT
(Sacramento)
----
In re V.V. et al., Persons
Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
SACRAMENTO
COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
V.G. et al.,
Defendants and Appellants.
C063602
(Super.
Ct. Nos. JD226962, JD228026)
Appellants V.G. (mother) and J.V. (father) appeal from the
juvenile court's orders terminating their parental rights as to the two
children, V.V. (born January 2005) and Va.V. (born August 2008). ( ADDIN BA xc <@st> xl 34 s
YCMGJH000001 xpl 1 l "Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 395, 366.26"
Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 395, 366.26.)[1] The
mother contends she was not notified of the ADDIN
BA xc <@osdv> xl 11 s YCMGJH000018 l "section
388" section 388 hearing where her reunification
services were terminated, and the juvenile court should have applied the
parent-child and sibling bond exceptions to adoption. The father contends the juvenile court erred
by preventing him from discharging retained counsel. We shall affirm the juvenile court's orders.
FACTS
AND PROCEDURE
In February 2008, the Sacramento
County Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) filed a nondetained
dependency petition pursuant to ADDIN
BA xc <@osdv> xl 28 s YCMGJH000019 l "section
300, subdivision (b)" section 300, subdivision (b), alleging violence, the mother's
history of substance abuse, and positive tests for marijuana and
methamphetamine in October 2007.
According to a March 2008 report, the
mother had moved in with L.H. and C.H., whom she considered her parents. The mother initially denied using drugs, but
later admitted using marijuana and methamphetamine. She used methamphetamine together with the
father; the mother believed V.V. would not be safe with him because the father
gets a lot of traffic day and night from selling drugs. Regarding domestic violence, the mother
stated, â€
Description | Appellants V.G. (mother) and J.V. (father) appeal from the juvenile court's orders terminating their parental rights as to the two children, V.V. (born January 2005) and Va.V. (born August 2008). ( ADDIN BA xc <@st> xl 34 s YCMGJH000001 xpl 1 l "Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 395, 366.26" Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 395, 366.26.)[1] The mother contends she was not notified of the section 388" section 388 hearing where her reunification services were terminated, and the juvenile court should have applied the parent-child and sibling bond exceptions to adoption. The father contends the juvenile court erred by preventing him from discharging retained counsel. Court shall affirm the juvenile court's orders. |
Rating |