In re S.D. CA2/6

Filed 3/16/26 In re S.D. CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

IN re S.D., a Person Coming 2d Juv. No. B345209 Under the Juvenile Court Law. (Super. Ct. No. 24JD-00036) (San Luis Obispo County)

COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES,

Respondent,

v.

N.D.,

Appellant.

N.D. (Mother) appeals an order granting the petition of respondent Department of Social Services (DSS) to modify a prior order granting visitation and reunification services. (Welf. &

Inst. Code,1 §§ 388, 395, subd. (a)(1).) She contends the juvenile court abused its discretion when it found continued visitation would be detrimental to her son, S.D. She also contends the disentitlement doctrine should have barred DSS’s petition because the agency failed to provide her with court-ordered reunification services. We will affirm the order. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND DSS filed a dependency petition regarding S.D. pursuant to section 300, subdivisions (b)(1), (g) and (j) in March of 2024. DSS alleged Mother suffered a mental health crisis requiring hospitalization. Mother had longstanding substance abuse issues and prior juvenile dependency cases involving three other children. Father had previous convictions for domestic violence and sexual abuse of a minor. DSS placed S.D. with a confidential resource family in San Luis Obispo. The juvenile court ordered S.D. detained from Mother and ordered weekly one hour supervised visits. The court sustained the section 300 petition after a contested jurisdiction and disposition hearing. It initially bypassed reunification services for both parents. Mother later petitioned to modify the bypass order. (§ 388.) She submitted exhibits showing she was participating in substance abuse treatment, mental health services, and parenting education. The court granted her petition in November of 2024. It ordered reunification services, including substantially increased visitation, vacated the section 366.26 hearing, and set a combined six- and twelve-month review hearing in April of 2025. Mother received two hours of supervised visitation with S.D. weekly.