Fear Not Law Articles: In re S.W.

In re S.W.

Filed 7/28/10 In re S.W. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re S.W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

STANISLAUS COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

C.B.,

Defendant and Appellant.

F059487

(Super. Ct. No. 510800)

O P I N I O N

THE COURT^*

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Nancy B.

Williamsen, Commissioner.

Nicole A. Williams, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

Appellant, C.B. (mother), appeals from a juvenile court order terminating parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, 366.26) to her daughter, S. (child).^{^[1]} She joins in arguments made by S.s father in his appeal, In re S.W. (case no. F059317), to the extent his arguments may enure to her benefit. The father challenged a juvenile courts order denying his petition ( 388) seeking custody or additional reunification services. The father also argued the juvenile court should have found termination would be detrimental to the child based on her relationship with the father ( 366.26, subd. (c)(i)(B)(1)).

On review of the record and the relevant law, we concluded the juvenile court properly exercised its discretion in denying the fathers petition and rejecting his claim that termination would be detrimental to the child. Because mother raises no independent claim of error in this appeal, our review is complete.

DISPOSITION

The order terminating parental rights is affirmed.

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

^*Before Wiseman, Acting P.J., Gomes, J., and Dawson, J.

^{^[1]} All statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise indicated.

Description	Appellant, C.B. (mother), appeals from a juvenile court order terminating parental rights (Welf. & Inst. Code, 366.26) to her daughter, S. (child). She joins in arguments made by S.s father in his appeal, In re S.W. (case no. F059317), to the extent his arguments may enure to her benefit. The father challenged a juvenile courts order denying his petition ( 388) seeking custody or additional reunification services. The father also argued the juvenile court should have found termination would be detrimental to the child based on her relationship with the father ( 366.26, subd. (c)(i)(B)(1)). On review of the record and the relevant law, we concluded the juvenile court properly exercised its discretion in denying the fathers petition and rejecting his claim that termination would be detrimental to the child. Because mother raises no independent claim of error in this appeal, our review is complete.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.