In re Jasmine M.
Appellant (mother) appeals the juvenile court order finding that her daughter, Jasmine M. (minor), was subject to jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (c), and the juvenile court order establishing a case plan requiring mother to attend individual counseling but not neuropsychological counseling or evaluation. According to mother, the finding under section 300, subdivision (c) was not supported by substantial evidence, and the case plan was not tailored to meet the neurological problems she faces due to a brain injury she suffered in 1994. As to the first argument, Court note that mother does not challenge the juvenile courts finding that the minor was a child described in section 300, subdivision (b). Thus, there is no basis for reversing the finding of jurisdiction. As to the second argument, we find that the case plan was appropriate under the circumstances and the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion.
Court affirm.
Comments on In re Jasmine M.