In re R.L. CA3

Filed 1/29/21 In re R.L. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ----

In re R.L. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile C090589 Court Law.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF (Super. Ct. Nos. JD239785, CHILD, FAMILY AND ADULT SERVICES, JD239786, JD239787, JD239788) Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

J.Q.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant J.Q., mother of the minors, appeals from the juvenile court’s dispositional judgment declaring the minors dependents of the juvenile court. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 300, 395.)1 Her sole contention is that the visitation order is invalid and

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

1

must be revised to provide for more details regarding her visitation. We find appellant has forfeited her claim on appeal by failing to object to the visitation order in the juvenile court. On August 28, 2019, the juvenile court entered a visitation order providing for regular visitation with the minors and adopted the written orders attached to the Department of Child, Family and Adult Services (Department) report. The written order provided for visitation with the minors consistent with their well-being, and delegated determination of the time, place, and manner of the visits, including the frequency and length, to the Department.2 Appellant contends the visitation order should specify the frequency and duration of the visits and complains that “[t]here is no provision in the order encouraging appellant or even allowing appellant to participate in critical aspects of a child’s daily life.” Appellant argues that the visitation order must also “spell out” her right to attend any nonemergency medical/dental appointments, school functions, extracurricular activities, religious services, and “more,” and must instruct the social worker/caregiver to advise her of the time and place of all such appointments and activities with sufficient notice so as to provide her with time to rearrange her schedule. She did not, however, object to the visitation order, or request such specifics be provided, in the juvenile court.