In re F.P. CA2/8

Filed 6/24/14 In re F.P. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

In re F.P. et al., Persons Coming Under the B253142 Juvenile Court Law.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY (Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND Super. Ct. No. CK74133) FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

TIFFANY B.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Donna Levin, Juvenile Court Referee. Affirmed.

Andrea R. St. Julian, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

John F. Krattli, County Counsel, County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel, and Navid Nakhjavani, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________________

Tiffany B. (hereafter Mother) appeals two orders of the juvenile dependency court denying two petitions filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 without a hearing.1 We affirm the juvenile court’s orders. STATEMENT OF FACTS We examined the facts and procedural history of the current juvenile dependency proceeding in two prior unpublished opinions. (See In re F.P. (May 14, 2012, B235638) [nonpub. opn.]; and see In re F.P. (Apr. 30, 2014, B250054) [nonpub. opn.].)2 We need not revisit those facts and history in full here. Instead, we briefly summarize the facts and history of the case to establish the context for Mother’s section 388 petitions which we address in this opinion. In 2008, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) detained Mother’s four children. Only two children, F.P. (born in June 2004) and Fr. P. (born in Feb. 2006) are the subject of Mother’s section 388 petitions which are at issue in the current appeal.3 The juvenile court sustained a petition alleging the children were at risk of harm within the meaning of section 300, subdivisions (b), (g), and (j), due to Mother’s mental and emotional problems and failure to take prescribed medications. In April 2010, the juvenile court terminated Mother’s reunification services, and, in October 2010, the court appointed the children’s paternal grandparents as their legal guardians. The children’s father, Frankie P., who was incarcerated and serving a prison term of 40 years to life, died in December 2010. Shortly after the juvenile court entered its orders appointing the paternal grandparents as the children’s legal guardians, Mother began to file regular section 388 petitions seeking changes of the court’s existing orders, including the legal guardianship.