In re Samantha B.

Filed 6/19/07 In re Samantha B. CA1/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed on May 29, 2007, be modified as follows:

1. On page 5, the first sentence of the first full paragraph under the heading DISCUSSION is modified to read as follows:

A child may be adjudged a dependent of the court when [t]he child has suffered, or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer, serious physical harm or illness, as a result of the failure or inability of his or her parent or guardian to adequately supervise or protect the child, or the willful or negligent failure of the childs parent or guardian to adequately supervise or protect the child from the conduct of the custodian with whom the child has been left, or by the willful or negligent failure of the parent or guardian to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment, or by the inability of the parent or guardian to provide regular care for the child due to the parents or guardians mental illness, developmental disability, or substance abuse. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 300, subd. (b).)

2. On page 7, at the end of the last sentence of the last full paragraph of the DISCUSSION, add as footnote 7 the following:

⁷ In a petition for rehearing filed June 15, 2007, Mother raises the argument that [t]here was no evidence in the juvenile court below that Samantha was not being provided regular care. Mother apologizes to the Court to the extent that she could have articulated the issues better in her opening and reply briefs . . . [and] believes the jurisdictional issue was raised sufficiently, albeit not succinctly, in the initial pleadings to justify this petition. Even assuming this argument is properly before the court, substantial evidence supports the conclusion that there was a substantial risk of serious physical harm or illness to Samantha, because of Mothers substance abuse. Mother made no claim she could provide Samantha regular care. She argued such care could be provided by grandmother.

There is no change in the judgment. Appellants petition for rehearing is denied.

DATED: ____________________ _______________________Acting P.J.

Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.

Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Property line attorney.