In re Ma.F. CA1/5

Filed 6/14/21 In re Ma.F. CA1/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE In re Ma.F., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

__________________________________ A160938

ALAMEDA COUNTY SOCIAL (Alameda County SERVICES AGENCY, Super. Ct. Nos. Plaintiff and Respondent, JD03067501, JD03067801) v.

C.H.,

Defendant and Appellant.

In this juvenile dependency proceeding, C.H. (Father) appeals from an order granting him visitation with two of his minor children, Ma.F and J.F., “as frequently as possible consistent with the children’s well-being,” to be implemented at the discretion of respondent social services agency.1 Father

1 Father has been referred to as C.H. or C.F. in the briefing and in prior appeals (A157057, A157984, A159798). Ma.F. and J.F. were referred to as Ma.P. and J.P. in those prior appeals. 1

contends the court improperly delegated its judicial authority over visitation to the agency. We will affirm the order. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In January 2019, the Alameda County Social Services Agency (Agency) filed dependency petitions pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b)2 as to five minors—aged one to six years at the time— alleging that Mother and Father had a history of domestic violence, Father perpetrated domestic violence against the children (including possibly breaking one of their legs), and Mother failed to protect the children. The court ordered the children detained. A. Appeal Numbers A157057 and A157984 At the jurisdictional and dispositional hearing on February 28, 2019, the court adjudged the children (including Ma.F.) dependents of the court, found true the allegations of the petition as amended, and ordered reunification services for Mother and Father. The court also continued to temporarily suspend visitation with Father pending the next review hearing. Father appealed (A157057). At ensuing review hearings on March 14, March 28, May 15, June 7, and July 19, 2019, the court continued the order temporarily suspending Father’s visitation based on reports from the minors’ therapists. Father appealed from these orders as well. (A157984). In consolidated appeal numbers A157057 and A157984, we affirmed the orders on the ground that sufficient evidence supported a finding that even therapeutic visits would threaten the children’s emotional wellbeing.