In re Jasmine T.
Filed 6/30/06 In re Jasmine T. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
| In re JASMINE T., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | |
| ALAMEDA COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JULIE T., Defendant and Appellant. | A112138 (Alameda County Super. Ct. Nos. J190914, 190915) |
Julie T. timely appeals from a September 28, 2005 order dismissing dependency jurisdiction with respect to her daughters Jasmine and Jewel. Julie previously appealed from the jurisdictional order in the same dependency proceedings. During the pendency of Julie's earlier appeal, the juvenile court issued a final custody order and dismissed the dependency proceedings. Consequently, on November 17, 2005, we dismissed Julie's earlier appeal on mootness grounds in an unpublished opinion: In re Jasmine T. et al (Nov. 17, 2005, A108359) 2005 WL 3086624 (In re Jasmine T.). The Alameda County Social Services Agency (Agency) has filed a motion to dismiss Julie's current appeal on the same grounds, as well as on res judicata grounds.[1]
Although Julie purports to appeal from a different, subsequent order, she reasserts in this appeal the same contentions of error she raised in In re Jasmine T. There is no evidence circumstances have changed since our decision in In re Jasmine T., and thus there is no reason why the reasoning in that decision should not apply equally to this appeal. Moreover, Julie has not filed any opposition to the Agency's motion to dismiss. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.
BACKGROUND
We quote the following factual and procedural background from our earlier decision: â€
