L. A. Cnty. Dep't of Children & Family Servs. v. Jazmin V. (In re C.V.), 15 Cal. App. 5th 566

Three-month-old C.V. lived with mother at maternal grandparents' home; father visited overnight occasionally.
Police found a .22 rifle (sawed-off barrel/stock), ammunition, and a magazine in a backpack wedged between the mattress and wall in the parents' bedroom; the rifle was unloaded.
Father admitted gang membership, had prior firearms-related convictions, and was arrested and later sentenced to 32 months; he told officers he had sawed off the gun the day before.
Mother knew of the gun generally, denied knowing it was next to the bed, signed a safety plan promising no weapons in the home and that father would not return, and promised to obtain a crib.
DCFS filed a section 300(b) petition alleging failure to protect; the juvenile court sustained the petition as to both parents, ordered monitored visits, parenting classes, counseling, and a 300-yard restraining condition on father.
The Court of Appeal reversed the jurisdictional finding and denied DCFS’s motion to dismiss the appeal as moot because the jurisdictional finding could prejudice the parents in future proceedings.

Issue	DCFS's Argument	Parents' Argument	Held
Whether substantial evidence supported dependency jurisdiction under Welf. & Inst. Code § 300(b) based on the gun discovery and father’s gang affiliation	The presence of the rifle and ammunition in the home, father’s criminal/gang activity, and potential for retaliation or future violence created a substantial risk of serious physical harm to the child	The unloaded rifle in a backpack wedged by the bed did not present an accessible or substantial risk to a three- to five-month-old; father was incarcerated for 32 months and mother had promised to bar him from the home	Reversed: no substantial evidence of current or ongoing substantial risk under § 300(b); single episode involving an unloaded firearm and father’s incarceration did not justify jurisdiction
Whether the appeal was moot after later termination of jurisdiction	DCFS argued dismissal as moot based on later orders terminating jurisdiction and a family law custody order	Parents argued the jurisdictional finding could prejudice them in future proceedings, so appeal should be heard	Appeal was not dismissed as moot; court reviewed merits to avoid inadvertent affirmance and potential prejudice

In re C.C., 172 Cal.App.4th 1481 (appellate court may review dependency appeal if dismissal would operate as an affirmance and risk future prejudice)
In re Heather A., 52 Cal.App.4th 183 (standard of appellate review on juvenile dependency factual findings)
In re Yolanda L., 7 Cal.App.5th 987 (section 300(b) jurisdiction may rest on evidence a parent stored a loaded gun accessible to a child)