In re Sa.V. CA3

Filed 11/20/25 In re Sa.V. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento) ----

In re Sa.V. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF C102625 CHILD, FAMILY AND ADULT SERVICES, (Super. Ct. Nos. JD242981, Plaintiff and Respondent, JD242982, JD242983)

v.

S.V.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant, S.V., father of the minors, Sa.V., H.V., and K.V. (collectively, the minors) appealed from the juvenile court’s order granting a petition for modification of visitation. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 388; statutory section citations that follow are found in the Welfare and Institutions Code unless otherwise stated.) The father contends the juvenile court denied him due process by granting the petition for modification without a contested hearing. Father has forfeited his claim and we affirm the juvenile court’s order.

1

FACTS AND HISTORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS In June 2024, the Sacramento County Department of Child, Family and Adult Services (Department) filed three separate petitions in the juvenile court alleging the minors, Sa.V., H.V., and Ke.V., ages 8-months, 2-years, and 3-years respectively, suffered or were at substantial risk of serious harm as a result of the failure or inability of the mother, K.V., to supervise or protect the minors adequately and to provide regular care for the minors due to her mental illness. The petition stated mother had been diagnosed with schizophrenia but was not receiving mental health treatment or taking medication. Mother suffered from delusions and had called law enforcement 12 times since January 2024 to report she needed help. The petition further claimed the father, S.V., failed to protect the minors from mother’s mental illness, which placed the minors at substantial risk of serious harm, abuse, and/or neglect. The juvenile court initially ordered emergency detention of the minors. At a subsequent hearing, the juvenile court found the Department had made a prima facie showing that the minors fell within section 300 and ordered the children to be detained. The court also issued a general visitation order and directed the Department to set a visitation schedule for father and services for both parents. On September 16, 2024, the juvenile court held a jurisdictional and dispositional hearing as well as a contested hearing on three separate petitions to modify visitation (§ 388), which were filed by the Department. The petitions for modification alleged that in August 2024 father made numerous verbal and physical outbursts towards Department staff resulting in staff members refusing to be a part of father’s visits due to safety concerns. During the hearing, father testified that he did not push, but only “brushed past” the visitation supervisor. He admitted security escorted him out of the visitation center on that occasion, that he “may have used . . . colorful language” because his visitation ended early, and that he “flicked . . . off” Department staff members. Father’s