gno.law

In re E.A. CA2/6

California Court of Appeal · B261219 · 2015-06-02 · Unpublished

Area
dependency
Panel
Kenneth R. Yegan (author), Arthur Gilbert, Steven Z. Perren

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

Filed 6/2/15 In re E.A. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

In re E.A., JR. and ANGELIQUE A., 2d Juv. No. B261219 Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court (Super. Ct. Nos. 1435874, 1435875) Law. (Santa Barbara County)

SANTA BARBARA COUNTY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DIANA R., Defendant and Appellant.

Diana R. (Mother) appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to her children, E.A., Jr. and Angelique A., and selecting adoption as the permanent plan. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.) We appointed counsel to represent Mother on appeal. On April 6, 2015, counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to In re Phoenix H. (2009) 47 Cal.4th 835. Counsel found no arguable issues and requested that Mother be permitted to personally file a supplemental opening brief. On April 6, 2015, we notified mother that she had 30 days within which to submit by letter or brief any contentions she wished us to consider, and that failure to do so would result in the dismissal of her appeal as abandoned. We have received no response from Mother. Because no claim of error or other defect has been raised in this matter, the appeal filed on January 7, 2015, is dismissed as abandoned. (In re Phoenix H., supra, 47 Cal.4th at pp. 844-846; In re Sade C. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 952, 994.) NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

YEGAN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P.J.

PERREN, J. Arthur A. Garcia, Judge Superior Court County of Santa Barbara ______________________________ Ernesto Paz Rey, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Appellant.

No appearance for Respondent.

Cites, in this corpus