legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re A.H. CA1/4

mk's Membership Status

Registration Date: May 18, 2017
Usergroup: Administrator
Listings Submitted: 0 listings
Total Comments: 0 (0 per day)
Last seen: 05:23:2018 - 13:04:09

Biographical Information

Contact Information

Submission History

Most recent listings:
P. v. Mendieta CA4/1
Asselin-Normand v. America Best Value Inn CA3
In re C.B. CA3
P. v. Bamford CA3
P. v. Jones CA3

Find all listings submitted by mk
In re A.H. CA1/4
By
10:21:2017

Filed 8/17/17 In re A.H. CA1/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

In re A.H. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

SOLANO COUNTY HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

BEATRICE L.,

Defendant and Appellant.

A150957

(Solano County Super. Ct. Nos.

J42871, J42882 & J42884)

OPINION

We are familiar with this dependency proceeding, having issued a prior opinion in the matter. (In re Mathias H. (Nov. 16, 2016, A145624 & A146233) [nonpub. op.].) Beatrice L. (mother) now appeals from the order terminating her parental rights with respect to the three children at issue—A.H. (born October 2010), I.R.L. (born May 2013), and Mathias H. (born September 2014)—and selecting adoption as the permanent plan. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) We appointed counsel to represent mother on appeal.

On June 6, 2017, counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, finding no arguable issues. By accompanying declaration, counsel reported that she had advised mother of the pendency of these proceedings, that a “No Issues Statement” would be filed, and that mother might be permitted to file a letter with this court suggesting any errors she believes were made in the proceedings below. No response has been received from mother.

DISPOSITION

Because no claim of error or other defect has been raised in this matter, the appeal filed on April 5, 2017, is dismissed as abandoned. (In re Phoenix H., supra, 47 Cal.4th at pp. 844-846; In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.)

_________________________

REARDON, J.

We concur:

_________________________

RUVOLO, P. J.

_________________________

RIVERA, J.

In re A.H. A150957





Description We are familiar with this dependency proceeding, having issued a prior opinion in the matter. (In re Mathias H. (Nov. 16, 2016, A145624 & A146233) [nonpub. op.].) Beatrice L. (mother) now appeals from the order terminating her parental rights with respect to the three children at issue—A.H. (born October 2010), I.R.L. (born May 2013), and Mathias H. (born September 2014)—and selecting adoption as the permanent plan. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) We appointed counsel to represent mother on appeal.
On June 6, 2017, counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835, finding no arguable issues. By accompanying declaration, counsel reported that she had advised mother of the pendency of these proceedings, that a “No Issues Statement” would be filed, and that mother might be permitted to file a letter with this court suggesting any errors she believes were made in the proceedings below. No response has been received from mother.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.
Views 9 views. Averaging 9 views per day.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale