In re R.D. CA4/2

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendants and appellants K.P. (Mother) and R.D. (Father) in this juvenile

dependency case are the parents of J. and R. The juvenile court took jurisdiction over the

children pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 3001 and, at a disposition

hearing, denied the parents reunification services. The court also set a hearing to be held

pursuant to section 366.26. The parents did not appeal or petition for an extraordinary

writ. The case proceeded to the section 366.26 hearing where the court terminated their

parental rights to the children. The parents appealed.

The parents challenge the court’s jurisdictional findings and the dispositional order

denying reunification services. Plaintiff and respondent San Bernardino County Children

and Family Services (CFS) asserts that the parents waived these arguments by failing to

file a petition for extraordinary writ. We agree with CFS. Mother also asserts that the

court erred in denying a request she made at the section 366.26 hearing for a continuance

so that she could file a request for change order, commonly referred to as a “section 388

petition.” She further argues that the court erred by failing to…