In re R.F. CA2/6

Filed 7/19/23 In re R.F. CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

In re R.F. et al., Persons 2d Juv. No. B325154 Coming Under the Juvenile (Super. Ct. Nos. J072734, Court Law. J072735) (Ventura County)

VENTURA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

V.G.,

Defendant and Appellant.

V.G. (Mother) appeals from the dispositional orders entered after the juvenile court granted legal guardianship of her minor daughters to a cousin in Riverside County. (Welf. & Inst. Code,1

1 Statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

§ 366.26, subd. (c)(4)(C).) Mother contends the court erred when it restricted visitation to four supervised hours per month and gave the guardian discretion to permit unsupervised overnight visits. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In December 2020 the Ventura County Human Services Agency (HSA) filed two section 300 petitions alleging that Mother had neglected her daughters, R.F. and G.F., and put them at risk of sexual abuse. Mother then failed to cooperate with HSA’s investigation and was dismissive about the attempted abuse. HSA also alleged Mother put R.F. and G.F. at risk of emotional harm and was unable to protect them due to ongoing domestic violence. At the jurisdictional hearing Mother submitted to the allegations in the petition. The juvenile court ordered R.F. and G.F. to be placed with a maternal cousin in Riverside County. It also ordered reunification services and supervised visitation for Mother. Mother maintained regular contact with R.F. and G.F. during the reunification period. She was allowed overnight weekend visits in July and August 2021, and had a nearly two- week-long visit with her daughters the following December. Mother and her daughters all indicated that they enjoyed these visits. After 18 months, HSA recommended terminating Mother’s reunification services due to her inability to provide safe housing for R.F. and G.F. According to the HSA social worker, Mother was facing eviction because she did not pursue housing referrals despite repeated opportunities to do so. In contrast, R.F. and G.F. had a secure and stable home environment with their