In re Brandon F.
Filed 3/1/13 In re Brandon F. CA4/1
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115
COURT
OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
ONE
STATE
OF CALIFORNIA
In re BRANDON F., a Person
Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
TONY M.,
Defendant and Appellant.
D062317
(Super. Ct.
No. EJ3374C)
APPEAL from
an order of the Superior Court
of
County, Laura J. Birkmeyer, Judge. Dismissed.
Tony M.
appeals an order summarily denying his Welfare and Institutions Code
section 388 petition in which he requested the court invalidate all previous
dependency orders regarding his son, Brandon F., and return the case to the
dispositional phase. He contends the
court was required to consider section 361.2 and to grant custody to him absent
a showing of detriment, the court erred by concluding he is not Brandon's
father under Adoption of Kelsey S. (1992)
1 Cal.4th 816 (Kelsey S.), and it
erred by denying his petition without a hearing. Because a subsequent order terminating Tony's
parental rights is now final, we dismiss the appeal as moot.
FACTUAL AND
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In April
2011, two-month-old Brandon and his siblings were taken into protective custody
when their mother, S.D., left them with a relative without providing food or
authorization for education or medical care.
At the detention hearing, S.D. stated she did not know the identity or
whereabouts of Brandon's father.
The court
declared Brandon a dependent of the
court, removed him from S.D.'s care, ordered him placed in foster care and
ordered reunification services for
S.D.
At a
hearing on January 11, 2012,
the court terminated S.D.'s services and set a section 366.26 hearing. S.D. then identified Tony as Brandon's
father, and the court located him in federal prison. His proposed release date was September 29.
A paternity
test showed Tony is Brandon's
biological father. He filed a section
388 petition, said he wanted custody and requested the court grant him status
as Brandon's father under
At the
hearing on July 5, 2012, the
court entered a judgment of paternity.
It summarily denied Tony's section 388 petition, denied his request to
be designated a Kelsey S. father and
set a section 366.26 hearing. Tony
appeals.
At the
section 366.26 hearing on August 3,
2012, the court terminated parental rights.
DISCUSSION
When an
appeal has become moot the
reviewing court must dismiss the appeal.
(In re Ruby T. (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 1201, 1204.) An appeal becomes moot when, through no fault of the respondent, the occurrence of
an event renders it impossible for the appellate court to grant the appellant
effective relief. (In re Jessica K.
(2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 1313, 1315-1316.)
The order
terminating parental rights is now final.
Thus, this court cannot grant Tony any effective relief. (See In
re Albert G. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 132, 134-135.) Moreover, the issues presented in the appeal
regarding his section 388 petition and the qualifications of a
issues of first impression or continuing public interest because they are well
settled in established law. The appeal
is dismissed as moot.
DISPOSITION
The appeal
is dismissed.
McDONALD,
J.
WE CONCUR:
BENKE, Acting P. J.
NARES, J.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1] Statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions
Code.
name="_ftn2" title="">[2] We take judicial notice of the August 3, 2012, juvenile
court order terminating parental rights.
