In re R.C. CA1/5

Filed 5/15/13 In re R.C. 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 R.C., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. SAN MATEO COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, Plaintiff and Respondent, A136830 v. ROBERT C., (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. JUV81564) Defendant and Appellant.

Robert C. (Father) appeals from an order of the juvenile court terminating his reunification services as to his daughter R.C. (Minor) at the 12-month review hearing. He contends the juvenile court erred: (1) in finding respondent San Mateo County Human Services Agency (Agency) provided him reasonable services to aid him in overcoming the problems that led to Minor’s removal (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.21, subd. (e));1 and (2) in reducing the frequency of visitation. We reject those contentions and affirm the juvenile court’s orders. BACKGROUND In June 2011, the Agency filed a section 300 juvenile dependency petition on behalf of Minor, born in June 2001. A second amended petition was filed in November, alleging jurisdiction under section 300, subdivisions (b) (failure to protect) and

1 All undesignated section references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. 1

(d) (sexual abuse). The petition alleged the police had been to Father’s home numerous times due to heated arguments; Father has a history of substance abuse and Minor reported Father molested her after drinking alcohol in the summer of 2010; Father’s molestation of Minor included touching her breasts and buttocks over and under her clothing; Minor is unwilling to return to Father’s care; and Minor’s mother had not provided care for or visited Minor since she was three years old.2 The August 2011 jurisdiction/disposition report indicated that Minor had been living with her paternal aunt (Aunt) since August 2010. Aunt reported that, on August 9, 2010, Father called and asked Aunt to pick up Minor because he and his girlfriend were “having issues.” Later that month Father had a stroke; Aunt kept physical custody of Minor and enrolled her in school. According to the August 2011 report, Minor told the Agency that “ ‘[Father] always hit [his girlfriend], pushed her[, and] pulled hair.” Minor reported that she did not feel safe with Father and did not want to live with him. In June 2011, Father’s girlfriend obtained a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Father based on allegations that he punched her, pulled her hair, hit her in the head with his work boots, and ordered the family dog to bite her. Father’s girlfriend stated in her declaration for the TRO that the authorities had been to the house several times due to reports of domestic violence, but she always denied the abuse because she was “in denial and co-dependent” with Father. Subsequently, the girlfriend denied to the Agency the allegations of physical abuse. Father admitted to many heated arguments with his girlfriend but denied physical abuse. Although Minor did not mention the sex abuse allegations in her statement as reflected in the August 2011 report, she previously reported to Agency social workers that Father had, in the summer of 2010, touched her on her “boobs” and “butt” under her clothes. Father had been drinking. Minor had reported the touching to Father’s girlfriend; the girlfriend confirmed to the Agency that Minor had told her about the