In Re Natasha A.

Frederick I. Marr, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Minor.

OPINION

RICHLI, J.

In this juvenile dependency case, the juvenile court found that Wayne A. had sexually molested his daughter, Natasha A.; it denied Wayne any visitation. In a previous appeal by Wayne, we affirmed the denial of visitation.

While Wayne's first appeal was pending, however, he made a request for supervised visitation, which the juvenile court denied. Later, the juvenile court declined to hold review hearings while the appeal was pending, and took the case off calendar instead. In this appeal, Wayne challenges both these actions.

We hold that the juvenile court properly denied Wayne's request for supervised visitation, because Wayne made the request orally and not by way of a petition showing changed circumstances under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388, [1] and because even Wayne's oral request failed to show any relevant changed circumstances; but we also hold that the juvenile court erred by refusing to conduct review hearings while the first appeal was pending.

On June 19, 1992, the Riverside County Department of Public Social Services (DPSS) filed a juvenile court petition…