T.W. v. Superior Court CA1/2

Filed 4/29/14 T.W. v. Superior Court CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

T.W., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CONTRA A141031 COSTA COUNTY, (Contra Costa County Respondent; Super. Ct. No. J11-01449) CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES BUREAU, Real Party in Interest.

T.W. filed this petition for extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452) to challenge the juvenile court’s order setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.261 hearing for her son, D. W. She contends she was denied constitutionally required notice that the court could take this action because the Contra Costa County Children and Family Services Bureau (the Bureau) had recommended long term foster care as the permanent plan. We will deny the petition and accompanying request for stay of the section 366.26 hearing. STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS D. was born in August 2009. On October 18, 2011, the Bureau filed a juvenile dependency petition alleging that he was at risk due to abuse or neglect of his sibling.

1 All Further undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

1

(§ 300, subd. (j).) It was alleged that petitioner had placed the child at substantial risk of harm in that his sister had been punched and slapped by the father and petitioner had failed to prevent the continued abuse, and the father had placed the child at substantial risk of harm in that he had punched and slapped the sibling on several occasions. The detention/jurisdiction report stated that D.’s 13-year-old sister had been physically abused in the parents’ care, including being hit with belts, open hands and fists, and “punched on her hands, arms, body, and head (usually on the right side) up to seven times a week.” It was reported that petitioner drinks “daily and heavily” and “usually gets violent when she drinks or takes her prescription pills.” The parents had been making “threatening phone calls” to the sister, who had been living with a paternal uncle and his wife since August 2011, when petitioner was evicted from the family’s home in Antioch. D. was reportedly living with the parents at petitioner’s mother’s home in San Francisco. When the sister was detained, the parents denied domestic abuse or drug or alcohol abuse in the home. The father, however, had a long criminal history including multiple convictions for domestic violence and possession of controlled substances. According to the parents, the sister was lying about the alleged abuse and the aunt was encouraging her to do so in order to keep the sister with her. The father noted that the allegations were made the day after the parents told the aunt that they were moving back to Antioch and the sister could return home. The father also stated that petitioner took medication for back pain and a seizure disorder, both of which resulted from a car accident when she was a child. D. was ordered detained after a hearing on October 19 but apparently then released to the parents, as an October 20 order indicates the minor was not detained. The jurisdiction hearing was held on several dates in November and December; on December 22, the parents pled no contest and the court sustained an allegation added to the petition that stated the child came within the provisions of section 300, subdivision (j), in that the father had used “inappropriate physical discipline” on the child’s sibling and the mother “failed to intervene.” The original allegations were dismissed.