In re K.W. CA3

Filed 8/29/22 In re K.W. CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 K.W., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile C095104 Court Law.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF (Super. Ct. No. JD231767) CHILD, FAMILY AND ADULT SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

Y.J.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Mother of the minor K.W. appeals from the juvenile court’s October 2021 orders appointing the minor’s foster parents as his legal guardians. Mother contends the visitation portion of the relevant orders must be reversed and remanded because of alleged inconsistencies and “conflicts,” as well as improper delegation of visitation authority to the guardian. Mother also argues the juvenile court abused its discretion and

1

violated her due process rights in requiring her to pay for the costs of visitation services. Disagreeing, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In June 2014, a dependency petition was filed in Los Angeles County pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b); the minor was six years old. 1 The minor was declared a dependent in July 2014, and the case was transferred to Sacramento County in August 2014. In July 2016, the juvenile court terminated mother’s reunification services. In March 2021, the court set a selection and implementation hearing pursuant to section 366.26. The hearing was eventually held on October 21, 2021, with the court rejecting mother’s October 14 request to reset the hearing. The written order from the October 21 hearing issued on October 25. In its July 2021 selection and implementation report, the Sacramento County Department of Child, Family and Adult Services (Department) noted mother was participating in monthly supervised virtual visits. The minor had been living with his current foster family since June 2019, and he was happy and doing well. Both the minor and his foster family were interested in guardianship; the minor also wanted to continue contact with mother. The Department recommended suspending parental rights and appointing the minor’s current caregivers as his legal guardians. With respect to visitation, the Department recommended the juvenile court order: “The mother shall have regular visitation with the [minor] as follows: Visitation between the child and the mother to occur one time per month for 2 hours in a supervised setting provided by [an agency in San Francisco], with the cost to be paid by the mother. The Guardians will