Ana M. v. Sup. Ct.
Filed 6/22/06 Ana M. v. Sup. Ct. CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| ANA M., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY, Respondent; ORANGE COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES AGENCY et al., Real Parties In Interest. | G036893 (Super. Ct. Nos. DP012195 & DP012198) O P I N I O N |
Original proceedings; petition for a writ of mandate/prohibition to challenge an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gary G. Bischoff, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Petition denied.
Deborah A. Kwast, Orange County Public Defender, Frank Ospino, Assistant Public Defender, and Paul T. DeQuattro, Deputy Public Defender, for Petitioner.
Benjamin P. de Mayo, County Counsel, Dana J. Stits, Senior Deputy County Counsel, and Aurelio Torre, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party In Interest.
Law Office of Harold LaFlamme, Regan Dean Phillips, for the Minors.
* * *
Ana M., mother of the minors, seeks an extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 38.1) to vacate an order of the juvenile court made at the 6-month review hearing terminating reunification services and setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing.[1] Ana also requests a stay of proceedings in the respondent court. Finding Ana's contentions lack merit, we deny the petition, rendering the request for a stay moot.
I
We begin by briefly summarizing the facts of this case. It concerns three sisters who share the same mother, but have different fathers.[2] In June 2005, then six-year-old Briana, two-year-old Priscilla, and one-day-old Mary Jane were taken into protective custody due to Ana's unresolved drug problems.
Priscilla was eventually placed with her father, Antonio J. He had a criminal history which included five felony arrests. Priscilla and Antonio lived in Laguna Niguel. Mary Jane's paternal aunt, Estela M., agreed to care for Briana and Mary Jane. They lived in Moreno Valley. Unfortunately, after the children were separated, Priscilla could not visit with her siblings due to (1) the distance between their homes, (2) problems with Antonio's driver's license, (3) Estela's unwillingness to drive on freeways, and
(4) Estela's busy schedule caring for Briana, Mary Jane, and two children of her own.
In a report prepared for the six-month review hearing, the Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) recommended Ana's reunification services be terminated. Ana had failed to enroll or participate in any drug treatment or counseling programs. She had failed to drug test and was not visiting the children consistently. Ana had obtained full-time employment and had moved from Orange County to Riverside. She had only managed to visit Briana and Mary Jane four times in the previous 10 weeks. She had a felony warrant for her arrest on drug-related charges. Mary Jane's father stated it would be in his child's best interests to be with his sister, Estela. Briana's father could not be located. Priscilla and her father qualified for a family maintenance plan.
It was also noted that â€
