In re T.J. CA2/4

INTRODUCTION

The juvenile court exercised jurisdiction over T.J., the child of E.J. (mother) and K.J. (father),1 pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code2 section 300, subdivision (b)(1), finding she was at substantial risk of serious physical harm due to mother’s inappropriate plan for T.J.’s care while mother was incarcerated. Mother left T.J. with maternal great-uncle, who is unable and unwilling to provide T.J. with ongoing parental care and supervision.3 The court removed T.J. from the parents under section 361 and placed her under the supervision of the Department of Children and Family Services (Department). On appeal, mother contends the juvenile court’s jurisdictional finding pertaining to her and its removal order are unsupported by substantial evidence. We disagree and affirm.

BACKGROUND

T.J., then five years old, came to the attention of the Department in August 2020. Well before the referral, T.J. lived with mother at maternal great-uncle’s home. Because mother knew she would have to serve time in prison, she arranged to have maternal great-uncle care for T.J. while she was incarcerated. Mother did not leave any documentation

Father is not a party to this…