ROXANNE H. v. Superior Court

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 547·35 Cal. App. 4th 1008·41 Cal. Rptr. 2d 760·95 Daily Journal DAR 7714·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4539
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 12, 1995A069540California1,598 words

Opinion

Opinion

Petitioner Roxanne H. is the mother of four dependent children of the juvenile court, Jessica G., Samantha G., Brandi G., and O’Ryan G. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 39.IB, petitioner filed a petition for extraordinary relief seeking review of the trial court’s order setting a permanency planning hearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. In her petition, she acknowledges that she was “not in compliance with the court-ordered [reunification] services agreement”; however, she claims she “has now stabilized her life and is in a position or would be in a position to parent the children on a full-time basis by July 10, 1995 (18 months from the original detention).” We will dismiss the petition as untimely. We publish this opinion to caution parties that we interpret the time deadline set out in rule 39.1B(k) for filing a writ petition to be mandatory.

Procedural History

By this writ proceeding, petitioner seeks review of the court’s ruling made at the 12-month review hearing setting the matter for a hearing pursuant to section 366.26. In taking this action, the court chronicled petitioner’s inability to meet the physical and emotional…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.