Z.M. v. Superior Court

Filed 4/21/06 Z.M. v. Superior Court CA2/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 FOUR

ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for extraordinary writ. Stephen Marpet, Juvenile Court Referee. Petition denied.

Darold M. Shirwo for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Larry Cory, Assistant County Counsel and Pamela Landeros, Deputy County Counsel for Real Party in Interest Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services.

Mother, Z.M., petitions for a writ of mandate requesting us to vacate the setting of a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing[1] regarding her two minor children, Kea.T. and Ke.M. She also requests the continuation of family reunification services with Kea. and the grant of such services with Ke. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the juvenile court's findings that return of Kea. to mother would likely result in severe emotional or physical harm, that the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) made reasonable efforts to enable Kea.'s safe return home and to complete steps needed to finalize the boy's permanent plan, and that mother was only in partial compliance with the plan. Accordingly, the juvenile court properly terminated reunification with Kea. With respect to Ke., we conclude that the juvenile court did not err in ordering no services pursuant to section 361.5, subdivision (b)(10), given that the termination of services with sibling Kea. was ordered at the same hearing. We deny mother's writ petition.

FACTS

The subjects of the dependency proceedings are petitioner's son Kea.T. (born 1998) and daughter Ke.M. (born 2005). DCFS brought a section 300 petition in September 2004 alleging that Kea. was physically abused by his emotionally disturbed marijuana-abusing mother and that he witnessed his mother trying to stab his maternal grandmother, resulting in mother's arrest. Kea. was placed in his grandmother's home.

In July 2005, DCFS filed a second section 300 petition alleging that mother has a six-year drug abuse history, that she tested positive for marijuana at Ke.'s birth, and that she has demonstrated paranoid behavior. Ke. was also placed in her grandmother's home.

Meanwhile, in January 2005, the juvenile court declared Kea. a dependent child of the court, and ordered DCFS to provide mother with family reunification services and monitored visits. The court ordered mother to participate in DCFS directed individual and drug counseling, parenting and anger management classes, and random drug testing. In addition, the court ordered DCFS to initiate a psychiatric evaluation of mother to determine whether she requires medication.

According to a DCFS report for November 2005, during a monthly home visit by the DCFS social worker in October, Kea. told the social worker that he liked living with his grandmother because she is nice to him and makes sure he gets what he needs, and that mother, in contrast, was sometimes mean and did not pay attention to him, spending time only with his younger sister. The grandmother confirmed that mother paid little attention to her son. Kea. said if he had to choose between being with his grandmother and mother, he would choose his grandmother. Mother was reported to be homeless, and not in compliance with the case plan. She did not show up for the randomly selected test dates of May 6 and 16, June 27, July 20, August 5 and 26, and September 2. Nor did she enroll in a drug treatment program. As of the date of DCFS's report, mother â€