In re Chevelle M.

Filed 6/29/06 In re Chevelle M. CA1/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

This is an appeal from a dispositional order declaring Chevelle M. and Marshall R. dependents of the juvenile court and removing them from the physical custody of their mother, Lori M. Mother contends the juvenile court's order was not supported by substantial evidence. We disagree and affirm the order with respect to Marshall R. We conclude, however, this appeal is moot, and so dismiss, with respect to Chevelle M.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Lori M. is the mother of Chevelle M. and Marshall R., age 10 and 5, respectively, at the time of the petition (collectively, minors). Martin J. is the father of Chevelle M. and Peter R. is the father of Marshall R.

On November 10, 2004, investigators from the Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services (the department) visited mother's house in Arcata, where she was living with the minors, Peter R. and others. The visit occurred after Marshall R. received emergency room medical treatment twice in less than two weeks. On October 12, 2004, Marshall R. received treatment for a broken arm after falling off a broken step stool in mother's backyard. Afterwards, the treating physician expressed concern about discharging him to mother's care because she appeared intoxicated. On October 23, 2004, Marshall R. received treatment for accidentally ingesting liquid laundry detergent he found in a Mountain Dew soda can on a dresser in mother's house. Marshall R. denied swallowing the detergent, but mother took him to the hospital for treatment just to be safe. Both incidents occurred when Marshall R. was under his parents' supervision.

During their November 10 visit, investigators found mother's house filthy, unsanitary and dangerous. In the backyard, they found a broken fence with missing boards, black garbage bags ripped open and trash strewn around the yard, a broken jungle gym, and the same broken step stool from which Marshall R. had fallen. In the house, they found grime and dirt everywhere, dirty dishes and dirty clothes piled high, and boxes of items blocking access to a back sliding door.

The department filed juvenile dependency petitions under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, alleging the minors had suffered, or were under a substantial risk of suffering, serious physical harm or injury as a result of mother's substance abuse and failure to supervise or protect.[1] The petition filed on behalf of Chevelle M. also alleged sibling abuse or neglect based on Marshall R.'s recent emergency room visits.

On February 17, 2005, the Humboldt County Sheriff Department placed the minors in protective custody after visiting mother's house and finding that conditions there created a substantial risk of serious physical harm or illness. In particular, a Sheriff Deputy found, in areas accessible to the minors, garbage piled about 3 feet high and 12 to 15 feet across, a steak knife with the blade facing up lying against a skateboard, a hot tub with empty soda bottles and beer cans floating in the water, a razor knife, a glass pipe used for smoking controlled substances, partially-filled wine and beer bottles, prescription drug bottles, large piles of debris and garbage, and a garbage-filled trailer.

Following the minors' placement in protective custody, the department advised mother to participate in certain family reunification services to facilitate the minors' return. Accordingly, the department referred mother to services to stabilize her mental health, address grief she was suffering due to the sudden death of her father over a year previously, treat her substance abuse, and improve her parenting and homemaking skills. The department provided mother the names and phone numbers of organizations that offered those services, and financial assistance to help her participate in them.

This was not the first time the department had advised mother to participate in family reunification services. Between April 1998 and October 2004, the department had received 16 referrals regarding the family alleging general neglect and substance abuse, at least three of which were substantiated. The department had offered mother a variety of services in connection with those referrals, including family preservation and public health nurse services, but she failed to participate in them, and her cases were closed due to lack of cooperation.

On April 12, 2005, the juvenile court found jurisdiction over the minors and, on May 16, held a contested dispositional hearing. At the hearing, the juvenile court also considered mother's motion under section 388 to have the minors returned to her physical custody, and Martin J.'s request as the non-offending parent to have Chevelle M. placed in his physical custody.

The juvenile court subsequently found, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the minors' continued detention was proper due to severe neglect impacting their physical and emotional health. Specifically, under section 361, subdivision (c), the court found that: (1) a substantial danger existed to the physical health, safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being of the minors if returned to mother, and that no reasonable means existed by which the minors' physical health could be protected without removing them from mother's physical custody, and (2) the minors were suffering severe emotional damage, as indicated by extreme anxiety, depression, withdrawal, or untoward aggressive behavior, and no reasonable means existed by which the minors' emotional health could be protected without removing them from mother's physical custody. Accordingly, the juvenile court declared the minors dependents, and placed Chevelle M. with her father, Martin J., and Marshall R. with a suitable relative. The court also denied mother's section 388 motion, and ordered that she receive reunification services and visitation rights. This appeal followed.

DISCUSSION

A. Mootness.

Mother challenges the juvenile court's order declaring the minors dependents and removing them from her physical custody. After filing her opening brief, however, mother stipulated in court to termination of dependency proceedings relating to Chevelle M., and to placement of the minor in the physical custody of her father, Martin J.[2] The department contends her stipulation renders this appeal moot with respect to Chevelle M. We agree.

â€