In re R.C. CA2/8

Filed 9/29/21 In re R.C. CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 R.C. et al., Persons Coming B310267 Under the Juvenile Court Law. LOS ANGELES COUNTY (Los Angeles County DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN Super. Ct. Nos. 19CCJP02956A-B) AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

S.M. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants;

B.C. et al.,

Respondents.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Sabina A. Helton, Judge. Affirmed. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. Suzanne Davidson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant S.M. Leslie A. Barry, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant L.C.

Estes Law Group and Polly J. Estes for Respondents B.C. and E.C. Melissa A. Chaitin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Minors. ********** Mother S.M. and father L.C. appeal the order terminating their parental rights, arguing the court erred when it denied their request for a continuance of the Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing to select and implement a permanent plan for their children R.C. and T.C. (All further statutory references are to this code, unless otherwise indicated.) They argue a continuance was in the best interest of the children, so that paternal aunt could be assessed for placement. They do not argue the juvenile court erred in terminating their parental rights, or that the continuance would have any impact on their parental rights. The children and their de facto parents argue mother and father lack standing to challenge the order, since their parental rights are not implicated by the order. We agree and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Because of the narrow issue on appeal, we will limit our discussion of the facts. This family came to the attention of the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) in April 2019, following a referral that mother and father abused heroin and methamphetamine, putting the children at risk of harm. The children were detained in May 2019. Maternal grandparents, who live in Arizona, had legal guardianship over the children’s two older half siblings, and wanted to be considered for placement of R.C. and T.C. The children were placed with E.C. and her husband B.C. (the foster parents) in June 2019, and were well bonded to their