Conservatorship of T. W.

Filed 2/4/15 Conservatorship of T. W. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (El Dorado) ----

Conservatorship of the Person and Estate of T. W. C075093

JANET WALKER-CONROY, as Public Guardian, (Super. Ct. No. etc., PMH20120001) Petitioner and Respondent,

v.

T. W.,

Objector and Appellant.

T. W., a Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS)1 conservatee, appeals the order finding that as a result of a mental disorder, she is gravely disabled and unable to provide for her basic personal needs of food, clothing, and shelter and the appointment of the public

1 Welfare and Institutions Code section 5000. Further undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

1

guardian as conservator. She contends the trial court failed to exercise its discretion in selecting a conservator, and the trial court abused its discretion in failing to analyze her request for substitute counsel. We agree the trial court erred in failing to exercise discretion in selecting a conservator. We, however, find the trial court satisfied the requirements of People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 to consider T.’s request for substitute counsel. Accordingly, we will affirm the order establishing a conservatorship, but reverse the order designating the public guardian as conservator and remand for further hearing. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY2 T. is diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Since 2010, she has been psychiatrically hospitalized repeatedly throughout the year. On January 17, 2012, the El Dorado Public Guardian filed a petition seeking a conservatorship of T. The informal investigation report executed on January 9, 2012, recommends appointment of the public guardian’s office as conservator, with no discussion of any other possible conservators. The follow- up formal investigation report filed on February 12, 2012, contains no discussion or recommendation relative to who should be appointed as the conservator. On May 1, 2012, the trial court ordered T. be placed under conservatorship of the El Dorado County Public Guardian. The public guardian filed a petition for reappointment of conservatorship on March 27, 2013. No investigation reports, formal or informal, were filed relative to the petition for reappointment. The parties appeared in court on April 25, 2013. T.’s father, Nate, also appeared. At that hearing, Nate indicated he was interested in being appointed as T.’s conservator. The conservator is responsible for monitoring and handling the conservatee’s financial