Nina E., A.S. v. Dcs ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                       NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.
    UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL
    AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
    IN THE
    ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS
    DIVISION ONE
    NINA E., A.S., Appellants,
    v.
    DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SAFETY, ERIC S., JOCELYN S., Appellees.
    No. 1 CA-JV 17-0168
    FILED 8-24-2017
    Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County
    No. JD 528623
    The Honorable Arthur T. Anderson, Judge
    APPEAL DISMISSED
    COUNSEL
    Maricopa County Public Advocate, Mesa
    By Suzanne W. Sanchez
    Counsel for Appellant Nina E.
    Arizona Attorney General's Office, Mesa
    By Ashlee N. Hoffmann
    Counsel for Appellee DCS
    Artemis Law Firm, PLLC, Scottsdale
    By Victoria E. Ames
    Counsel for Appellee Intervenor Jocelyn S.
    NINA E., A.S. v. DCS, et al.
    Decision of the Court
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court, in which
    Presiding Judge Jon W. Thompson and Judge Jennifer B. Campbell joined.
    B R O W N, Judge:
    ¶1            Nina E. (“Mother”) appeals from the juvenile court’s order
    changing A.S.’s placement. On July 10, 2017, the juvenile court held a
    contested severance hearing at which Mother knowingly, intelligently, and
    voluntarily chose to waive her rights to contest the termination of her
    parental rights. This renders Mother’s appeal moot.
    ¶2             As a policy of judicial restraint, this court generally will not
    address moot or abstract questions. Lana A. v. Woodburn, 
    211 Ariz. 62
    , 65, ¶
    9 (App. 2005). “A decision becomes moot for purposes of appeal where, as
    a result of a change of circumstances before the appellate decision, action
    by the reviewing court would have no effect on the parties.” Vinson v.
    Marton & Assoc., 
    159 Ariz. 1
    , 4 (App. 1988). The juvenile court terminated
    appellant Nina E.’s parental rights to A.S. on July 10, 2017. As a result, a
    decision on the merits of Mother’s appeal from the order changing A.S.’s
    placement would have no effect on the parties because Mother no longer
    has any parental rights with respect to A.S.
    ¶3            Accordingly, it is ordered dismissing this appeal.1
    AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
    FILED: AA
    1      A.S., through her guardian ad litem, also appealed the placement
    order but did not file an appellate brief or join in Mother’s briefing. Thus,
    pursuant to Arizona Rule of Juvenile Court Procedure 106(E), we dismiss
    the appeal filed by A.S.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1 CA-JV 17-0168

Filed Date: 8/24/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021