Fear Not Law Articles: Robert M. v. Super. Ct.

Robert M

Robert M. v. Super. Ct.

Filed 6/16/11 Robert M. v. Super. Ct. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

ROBERT M.,
Petitioner,
v.

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF KERN COUNTY,

Respondent;

KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,

Real Party in Interest.

F062226

(Super. Ct. No. JD123728-00)

O P I N I O N

THE COURT^*
ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for extraordinary writ review. Jon E. Stuebbe, Judge.
Robert M., in pro. per., for Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent.
Theresa A. Goldner, County Counsel, and Mark L. Nations, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest.
-ooOoo-
Petitioner in propria persona seeks an extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452 (rule 8.452)) from the juvenile court’s order issued at a contested six-month review hearing setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26^{^[1]} hearing. We conclude the petition fails to comport with the procedural requirements of rule 8.452. Accordingly, we will dismiss the petition as facially inadequate.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
Petitioner is the alleged father of Patrick, the subject of this writ petition. In March 2010, then one-year-old Patrick was removed from the custody of his mother, Kimberly.^{^[2]} The juvenile court exercised its dependency jurisdiction and ordered six months of reunification services for Kimberly. However, Kimberly failed to comply with her court-ordered services. Consequently, in March 2011, at the six-month review hearing, the juvenile court terminated Kimberly’s reunification services and set a section 366.26 hearing. This petition ensued.
DISCUSSION
Petitioner seeks reunification services and visitation. For the reasons set forth below, we cannot grant relief.
California Rules of Court, rule 8.450-8.452 (rule) govern the procedures for initiating dependency writ proceedings in this court and filing the appropriate documentation. The purpose of writ proceedings is to facilitate review of the juvenile court’s order setting the section 366.26 hearing. (Rule 8.450(a).) To that end, the petition must support any claim(s) of error with citation to the appellate record and legal authority. (Rule 8.452(b).) In the absence of a claim of error, this court will not independently review the appellate record for possible errors. (In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.)
In this case, petitioner does not contend the juvenile court erred in issuing any of the findings and orders it made at the section 366.26 setting hearing. Since he does not raise juvenile court error, his petition is inadequate for review. Therefore, we will dismiss it.
DISPOSITION
The petition for extraordinary writ is dismissed. This opinion is final as to this court.

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

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

^{^[2]} Kimberly did not file a writ petition.

Description	Petitioner in propria persona seeks an extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452 (rule 8.452)) from the juvenile court's order issued at a contested six-month review hearing setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26[1] hearing. We conclude the petition fails to comport with the procedural requirements of rule 8.452. Accordingly, we will dismiss the petition as facially inadequate.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.