State of Utah in the interest of S.B.F.Annotate this Case
IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS
State of Utah in the interest of T.B., J.B., and C.B.,
persons under eighteen years of age.
State of Utah,
(Not For Official Publication)
Case No. 20010244-CA
F I L E D
(November 23, 2001)
2001 UT App 357
Eighth District Juvenile, Duchesne Department
The Honorable Larry A. Steele
S.B.F., Duchesne, Appellant Pro Se
Mark Shurtleff, Carol L.C. Verdoia, and John M. Peterson, Salt Lake City, for Appellee
Before Judges Greenwood, Jackson, and Davis.
S.B.F., the natural mother of T.B., appeals from decisions entered on various dates enumerated in her notice of appeal. This case is before the court on a sua sponte motion for summary affirmance. The State filed a response; however, S.B.F. did not respond.
Rule 3(a) of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure requires a notice of appeal to be filed within thirty days of the entry of the order or judgment from which the appeal was taken. S.B.F.'s notice of appeal was filed within thirty days after entry of the combined Adjudication and Dispositional Order, which was final and appealable. We deem the appeal to have been taken from that order. To the extent that S.B.F. seeks review of orders and hearings occurring after the March 12, 2001 filing date of the notice of appeal or seeks intervention by this court in the ongoing juvenile court proceedings, the relief requested is beyond the scope of this appeal.
S.B.F. admitted the allegations of the Verified Petition for Custody, as amended. Accordingly, S.B.F. admitted that T.B. was an abused child based on the allegations of the amended petition and that she would remain in state custody. S.B.F. has asserted no challenge to the findings of fact and conclusions of law. S.B.F. does not make specific allegations of error by the juvenile court in entry of the Adjudication and Dispositional Order. Based upon her admissions to the amended petition, she raises no grounds for appeal.
After filing her notice of appeal, S.B.F filed the first of several petitions seeking the return of custody of T.B. based upon alleged deficiencies in the actions of the Division of Child and Family Services. On March 23, 2001, the juvenile court entered an Order and Decree finding T.B. guilty of theft and contempt of court. To the extent S.B.F. seeks review of this order or challenges the ongoing management of the case, the claims are beyond the scope of this appeal from the adjudication order.
We affirm the Adjudication and Dispositional Order.
Pamela T. Greenwood, Presiding Judge
Norman H. Jackson, Associate Presiding Judge
James Z. Davis, Judge