Skip to content
Name: In re D.P.
Case #: H041754
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 06/16/2015
Summary

Appellate court can address one of three allegations affecting jurisdiction of the minor going forward. The juvenile court sustained allegations under section 300, subdivisions (b), (c), and (j) and placed D.P into protective custody. On appeal, mother contended that the juvenile court erred in sustaining the petition under section 300, subdivision (c) because the evidence was insufficient to show that D.P. suffered severe emotional harm. The Department contended that the appeal was moot because appellant did not also challenge the juvenile court jurisdiction under subdivisions (b) and (j). The appellate court found that the appeal should be addressed on the merits because the subdivision (c) finding could potentially affect future dependency proceedings. It also found that substantial evidence supported the court’s subdivision (c) finding. Although the minor was not currently suffering from emotional damage, mother’s failure to protect the minor from exposure to domestic violence and father’s alcohol abuse amounted to sufficient evidence that there was a risk that the minor would suffer from future emotional harm.