In re C.R. CA5

California Court of Appeal May 1, 2014 No. F068113Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in ordering a minimum of one monthly supervised visit between the mother and her children, as the court properly delegated the management of visitation details to the legal guardian and provided a mechanism for increased visitation based on the mother's consistency.

Issues

Whether the juvenile court's visitation order was unnecessarily restrictive and constituted an abuse of discretion.
Whether the juvenile court improperly delegated discretion to the legal guardian regarding the frequency and duration of visitation.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We review a visitation order made in a dependency proceeding for abuse of discretion and will not disturb the order unless an abuse of discretion is clearly shown.”

“Once visitation is ordered, the juvenile court may delegate discretion to manage the details of the visits.”

“The juvenile court had ample reason to limit mother’s visits to once a month at this point.”

Filed 5/1/14 In re C.R. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

In re C.R. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

FRESNO COUNTY DEPTARTMENT OF F068113 SOCIAL SERVICES, (Super. Ct. No. 07CEJ300083) Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. OPINION L.G.,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Mary Dolas, Commissioner. Jamie A. Moran, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kevin Briggs, County Counsel, William G. Smith, Deputy County Counsel for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Kane, J. and Franson, J.

-ooOoo-

The juvenile court appointed a relative as legal guardian and terminated dependency jurisdiction over six-year-old C.R., five-year-old A.R., and three-year-old V.R. (the children). Their mother, L.G., challenges the parental visitation order. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Section 300 Petition The children came to the attention of the Fresno County Department of Social Services (the Department) in October of 2011, when mother was seen spitting at, screaming at, throwing things at, and hitting her children. A Welfare and Institutions Code section 3001 petition alleged, pursuant to subdivision (a), that mother used excessive physical discipline on the children and their father, F.R., failed to protect the children from mother.2 The petition further alleged, pursuant to section 300 subdivision (b), that mother had a substance abuse problem that caused her to fail at reunification with another child, G.R. It also alleged, pursuant to subdivision (j), that the children were at risk of harm due to the earlier case involving G.R. Detention The November 2011 report prepared in anticipation of detention stated that the children were in foster care. According to the report, mother had had a number of child welfare referrals over the years involving three other children, most of which were found to be inconclusive or which were evaluated out. But mother had been involved in a case in 2007 in which she lost custody of G.R. due to her methamphetamine use. G.R. was eventually adopted.

In re C.R. CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief