Melissa Z. v. Super. Ct. CA5

Filed 2/11/14 Melissa Z. v. Super. Ct. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

MELISSA Z., Petitioner, F068524 v. (Super. Ct. Nos. JJV060010C & THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TULARE JJV060010D) COUNTY,

Respondent; OPINION

TULARE COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

Real Party in Interest.

THE COURT ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for extraordinary writ review. Juliet L. Boccone, Judge. Rodney Richard Rusca, for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Kathleen Bales-Lange, County Counsel, and Carol E. Helding, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest. -ooOoo-

 Before Levy, Acting P.J., Kane, J., and Peña, J.

Petitioner, Melissa Z., (Mother) seeks an extraordinary writ seeking relief as to two of her children, C.S. and E.S., from an order setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.261 hearing and denying her Request to Change Court Order (§ 388). We dismiss the petition. FACTS On September 14, 2010, C.S. and E.S. were detained and placed together in foster care along with Mother’s two other children, D.S. and S.Z.2 On October 5, 2010, the court adjudged the children dependents of the court and ordered family reunification services for Mother. It also ordered two one-hour visits per week for Mother. On October 27, 2011, following a contested hearing the court terminated reunification services for Mother and reduced Mother’s visitation to one one-hour visit per month. The court also found that reasonable services had been provided to Mother by real party in interest, the Tulare County Health and Human Services Agency (the Agency) and it set a date for the permanency planning hearing (§ 366.26). On February 10, 2012, Mother filed a Request to Change Court Order (§ 388) asking the court to return the four children to her care or alternatively to reopen reunification services. On March 20, 2012, following a contested hearing, the court terminated Mother’s parental rights with respect to D.S. and denied the section 388 request with respect to the other children.