In re T.S. CA5

Filed 9/26/23 In re T.S. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re T.S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

TULARE COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN F085886 SERVICES AGENCY, (Super. Ct. No. JJV074704A) Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. OPINION A.V. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Glade F. Roper, Judge. (Retired Judge of the Tulare County Sup. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Jesse F. Rodriguez, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendants and Appellants, A.V. and G.V. Jennifer M. Flores, County Counsel, and Jason G. Chu, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P. J., Levy, J. and Meehan, J.

G.V. (maternal aunt) and A.V. (maternal uncle) (collectively, the appellants) are the former legal guardians of T.S. (born August 2009). Respondent is the Tulare County Health and Human Services Agency (agency). The parties seek a stipulated reversal of the juvenile court’s order terminating the legal guardianship and the order issuing jurisdictional and dispositional findings. The parties also seek to remand the matter to the juvenile court for a new jurisdiction hearing and an immediate issuance of the remittitur. We accept the stipulation, reverse the order terminating the legal guardianship, remand for a new jurisdiction hearing, and order an immediate issuance of the remittitur FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On January 31, 2023, the agency filed a petition on behalf of T.S. pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code1 section 300, subdivisions (d) (sexual abuse) and (g) (no provision for support). Allegation d-1 alleged T.S. was being sexually abused by an adult male cousin who regularly visited the home. At the time, appellants were the legal guardians of T.S. The petition alleged appellants knew or reasonably should have known T.S. was in danger of sexual abuse and failed to protect her. Allegations g-1 and g-2 alleged mother and father’s whereabouts were unknown and T.S. had been left without support. On February 1, 2023, the juvenile court held a detention hearing and the court found a prima facie case had been established, ordered T.S. detained, and set a jurisdiction and disposition hearing. Prior to the jurisdiction and disposition hearing, the agency filed a motion to terminate the guardianship pursuant to section 728. According to the motion, appellants did not want to continue as T.S.’s legal guardians and did not want to reunify with her.