In re C.B. CA3

Filed 9/29/21 In re C.B. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Calaveras) ----

In re C.B. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile C092938 Court Law.

CALAVERAS COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN (Super. Ct. Nos. 19JD6154, SERVICES AGENCY, 19JD6153)

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

C.B. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

Appellants C.B. (mother) and M.B. (father) appeal from the juvenile court’s orders terminating parental rights and freeing the minors for adoption.1 (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395.)2 They contend the juvenile court erred in finding inapplicable the beneficial parental relationship exception and/or the sibling exception to adoption.

1 Mother’s notice of appeal included only minor C.B. However, because father’s notice of appeal includes both minors and parents raise the same issues, mother’s failure to file a notice of appeal as to minor F.B. does not affect our disposition. 2 Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

1

During the pendency of this appeal, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in In re Caden C. (2021) 11 Cal.5th 614 (Caden C.), clarifying the process and standards for determining whether parents have established the beneficial parental relationship exception to adoption. Because the juvenile court did not have the benefit of the guidance in Caden C. when it issued its rulings and the record does not establish compliance with that guidance, we will reverse the order terminating parental rights and remand for reconsideration. BACKGROUND In February 2019, Calaveras County Health and Human Services Agency (the Agency) filed a section 300 petition on behalf of minors C.B. (then age 22 months) and F.B. (then age seven months) based on domestic violence involving the parents, mother’s mental health issues, father’s substance abuse, and the unsanitary conditions of the home. The juvenile court took jurisdiction, declared the minors dependent children of the court, removed them from parental custody and provided reunification services.3 Parents were provided twice weekly visitation with the minors. The minors were returned to parental custody with family maintenance services in August 2019, but removed again after a protective custody warrant was issued in October 2019. The minors were placed in the same concurrent foster-adopt home in which they had been previously placed. Parents were again provided twice weekly visitation with the minors. Parents failed to reunify, and services were terminated in May 2020. Visitation was reduced to one hour per week. The contested section 366.26 hearing took place on October 7, 2020. Evidence was presented that parents regularly attended visits, the minors are always happy to see