Conservatorship of J.G. CA1/1

Filed 12/10/25 Conservatorship of J.G. CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

Conservatorship of the Person of J.G.

PUBLIC GUARDIAN OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, A173234

Petitioner and Respondent, (Contra Costa County v. Super. Ct. No. P1000060) J.G., Objector and Appellant.

J.G. appeals from an order reappointing the Public Guardian of Contra Costa County as the conservator of her person pursuant to the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS).1 But she raises no challenge to that ruling, or to the trial court’s subsequent determinations concerning her least restrictive placement; rather, she complains of earlier delays in placing her per a stipulation she concedes was “voided” by setbacks in her treatment. We

1 Welfare and Institutions Code, section 5000 et seq. Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. The quoted portion of the factual background comes from our prior opinion, Conservatorship of the Person of J.G. (Apr. 24, 2023, A165316) [nonpub. opn.]. We take judicial notice of the record in that appeal. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 459.)

1

affirm the trial court’s orders and decline to address J.G.’s arguments, which are not properly before us in this appeal. I. BACKGROUND “J.G. (born in 1975) has been conserved since 2010. Prior to that time, she had over 210 mental health contacts with Contra Costa County. She began abusing drugs at 13 years of age, including crack, methamphetamine, LSD, alcohol, and marijuana. J.G. is wheelchair bound due to hip dysplasia from a car accident, which complicates her level of care.” For the past several years, J.G. has been placed at Crestwood Manor in Fremont, a secured skilled nursing facility with specialized treatment program (“SNF-STP”). In 2023 and 2024, J.G. expressed to the trial court and counsel for the Public Guardian (county counsel) that she wished to be moved to a less restrictive board and care facility. J.G. agreed to the extension of her conservatorship on a temporary basis on the understanding that she would be referred to such facilities; however, the Public Guardian initially “was clear that [she] did not find Board and Care . . . to be [J.G.’s] least restrictive placement, but agreed [only] to make referrals.” Several board and care facilities denied these referrals. Nevertheless, in June 2024, county counsel “agree[d] to a board and care placement level.” The Public Guardian continued to make referrals, but counsel reported over the course of several status hearings that J.G. was “very difficult to place” because of both her “behaviors and her physical needs.” J.G. was waitlisted for referral reviews at multiple facilities. During a status hearing in January 2025, county counsel expressed her belief that her client could only contact board and care facilities that “the County currently contracts with.” J.G. objected. The trial court stated that J.G. “needs to be moved to the least restrictive placement level,” and “[t]hat