In re B.D.
Filed 3/22/06 In re B.D. CA2/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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 ONE
| In re B.D., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. | B185233 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK54879) |
| LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ELIZABETH D., Defendant and Appellant. |
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Stephen Marpet, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed.
Christopher Blake, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Larry Cory, Assistant County Counsel, and Frank J. DaVanzo, Principal Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_____
Elizabeth D., the mother of B.D. (born in Feb. 2004), appeals from an August 5, 2005 order terminating her parental rights, claiming that the juvenile court erred in failing to invoke the 180-day waiting procedure in Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, subdivision (c)(3) because of B.D.'s physical conditions and serious developmental delays.[1] Because substantial evidence supports the implied findings that B.D. was not difficult to place for adoption and that there was an available prospective adoptive parent, we affirm the order.
BACKGROUND
Elizabeth D. (Mother) tested positive for amphetamines at B.D.'s birth. B.D. tested negative for drugs but was born with symptoms of drug withdrawal, including being â€
