In re L.V.
Filed 9/28/10 In re L.V.
CA2/5
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
FIVE
In re L.V. et al., Persons
Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
B221784
(Los Angeles
County
Super. Ct.
No. JD51400)
LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT
OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
MERCEDES V.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from
an order of the Superior Court
of Los Angeles
County, Robert Stevenson, Juvenile Court Referee. Dismissed.
Law Office
of Amy Z. Tobin and Amy Z. Tobin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
for Defendant and Appellant.
Andrea
Sheridan Ordin, County Counsel, James
M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel and Sarah Vesecky, Deputy County Counsel for
Plaintiff and Respondent.
The maternal grandmother, Miram V., appeals the January 11, 2009 denial of her
Welfare and Institutions Code[1]
section 388 petition filed on December
30, 2009. The section 388
petition sought placement of the two children, L.V. and Leslie V., with the
maternal grandmother. The section 388
petition was denied because the maternal grandmother had a disqualifying
attempted murder arrest. The maternal
grandmother appeals from this order contending the alleged arrest is not a
disqualifying factor. On August 5, 2010, a full hearing was
held on the issue of placement of the two children with the maternal
grandmother. This time, it was clear
that the maternal grandmother's prior arrest was not a legally disqualifying
factor. The juvenile court refused to
place the two children with the maternal grandmother. Thus, all of the maternal grandmother's
contentions are moot as there has been an on the merits determination the two
children should not be placed with her.
(Eye Dog Foundation v. State Board
of Guide Dogs for the Blind (1967) 67 Cal.2d 536, 541; In re Jessica K. (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 1313, 1315-1316.)
The appeal
is dismissed.
NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
TURNER,
P. J.
We concur:
KRIEGLER,
J. KUMAR,
J.*
Publication courtesy of California
free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
San Diego Case
Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] Future
statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by
the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California
Constitution.
